UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
AT  LOS  ANGELES 


THE    BARTRAMIAN    SANDPIPER    OR    UPLAND    PLOVER. 
A  Useful   Bird,  now   in   Danger  of  Extermination. 


SPECIAL  REPORT 

ON  THE 

DECREASE  OF  CERTAIN  BIRDS,  AND  ITS  CAUSES, 
WITH  SUGGESTIONS  FOR  BIRD  PROTECTION, 


EDWARD    HOWE    FORBUSH. 


PREPAKED  UNDER  THE  DIRECTION  OF  THE  MASSACHUSETTS  STATE  BOARD  OF 

AGRICULTURE. 


THE  DECREASE  OF  CERTAIN  BIRDS,  AND  ITS  CAUSES, 
WITH  SUGGESTIONS  FOR  BIRD  PROTECTION. 


BY   EDWARD   HOWE   FORBUSH,    ORNITHOLOGIST   TO   THE   BOARD. 


In  the  pursuit  of  an  inquiry  regarding  the  destruction  of 
birds  by  the  elements,  which  was  authorized  by  this  Board 
in  1903,  some  evidence  was  obtained  relating  to  a  decrease 
in  the  number  of  birds  from  other  causes.  It  was  asserted 
by  correspondents  that  the  extermination  of  certain  species 
was  already  imminent,  and  That  many  others  were  rapidly 
decreasing  in  numbers.  The  secretary  of  the  Board,  upon 
being  informed  of  this  evidence,  authorized  an  investigation 
of  the  alleged  decrcu.se  and  threatened  extirpation  of  useful 
birds,  with  a  view  to  determine  what  species  had  suffered 
most,  and  whether  it  would  be  practicable  to  furnish  them 
better  protection.  Four  hundred  circulars  requesting  infor- 
mation were  prepared  and  sent  out  in  July.  They  were 
mailed  to  naturalists,  officers  of  the  Audubon  Society,  cor- 
respondents of  the  Board  of  Agriculture,  secretaries  of 
game  protective  associations,  taxidermists,  officers  of  the 
Massachusetts  Commissioners  on  Fisheries  and  Game,  sports- 
men, market  hunters,  principals  of  academies,  and  intelli- 
gent observers  generally. 

It  was  intended  to  compile  the  evidence,  when  received, 
into  the  form  of  a  bulletin ;  but  this  proved  impracticable, 
on  account  of  the  vast  amount  of  material  returned  in 
answer  to  the  inquiry.  It  was  finally  decided  to  prepare  a 
special  report  on  the  subject. 

Some  of  the  circulars  returned  contained  little  informa- 
tion, but  two  hundred  and  seventeen  of  them  furnished  data 
of  more  or  less  value.  Several  correspondents  sent  excel- 
lent annotated  local  lists.  About  one  hundred  letters  also 

195892 


430  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

were  received.  Most  of  the  reports  and  letters  were  from 
Massachusetts,  representing  every  county  of  the  State,  but 
a  few  came  from  other  States.  A  list  of  observers  and  cor- 
respondents is  appended  to  this  report. 

TIIE  DESTRUCTION  OF  BIRDS  BY  THE  ELEMENTS. 

The  unusual  weather  of  1903-04  was  the  evident  cause 
Ufa  recent  •scarcity  of  certain  species  mentioned  in  many 
cases  by  correspondents.  This  additional  evidence  of  the 
effects  of  the  June  storms  of  1903,  or  of  the  winter  of 
1903-04,  will  be  presented  (1)  as  a  sequel  to  the  report  of 
last  year,  and  (2)  in  order  that  the  results  produced  by  the 
elements  in  less  than  two  years  may  not  be  confounded  with 
those  effected  by  other  and  more  continuous  destructive 
forces. 

In  glancing  over  the  reports  for  1904,  it  becomes  evident 
at  once  that  the  destruction  of  eggs  and  nestlings  by  the 
June  storms  of  1903  caused,  jjo_.great  noticeable  and  gener- 
ally observed  decrease  of  many  species  in  1904.  This  may 
be  accounted  for  in  part  by  the  fact  ( 1 )  that  some  of  the 
species  affected  rear  more  than  one  brood  in  a  season,  and 
so  were  able  to  bring  up  young  either  before  or  after  the 
storms;  and  in  part  by  the  theory  (2)  that  a  large  share  of 
the  young  birds  reared  each  season  never  return  from  their 
southern  journey,  but  succumb  to  accidents  and  fatalities  on 
the  way ;  therefore  a  great  mortality  among  the  nestlings  of 
one  season  may  not  have  a  very  noticeable  effect  the  suc- 
ceeding year. 

Trained  observers,  however,  noted  in  their  localities  a 
marked  decrease  of  certain  breeding  warblers,  chimney 
swifts  and  swallows,  although  a  few  reported  swifts  and 
swallows  as  common  or  abundant.  On  some  of  the  mead- 
ows overflowed  in  1903  red-winged  blackbirds  and  marsh 
wrens  were  much  reduced.  Long-billed  marsh  wrens  have 
nearly  disappeared  from  certain  meadows  where  they  were 
formerly  common.  Bobolinks,  orioles  and  vireos  are  men- 
tioned particularly  as  scarce  locally  the  past  season.  Night 
hawks  and  whip-poor-wills  have  disappeared  from  some  local- 
ities. Mr.  Thomas  M.  Burney  of  Lynn  reports  a  75  per 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  431 

cent  decrease  in  warblers.  Mr.  Rufus  H.  Carr  of  Brockton 
reports  breeding  black-and-white  warblers,  prairie  warblers 
and  redstarts  in  about  half  their  usual  numbers,  martins 
gone,  swifts  comparatively  scarce,  and  the  barn  swallow  the 
only  swallow  commonly  seen. 

Most  of  the  common  birds  appeared  in  about  their  usual 
numbers  in  the  migrations,  but  no  considerable  flight  of  the 
warblers,  which  nest  mainly  north  of  Massachusetts,  was 
reported.  As  in  1903,  these  warblers  were  again  compara- 
tively scarce  in  their  migrations.  The  flight  seemed  very 
light  in  Bristol,  Plymouth  and  Middlesex  counties,  where  I 
watched  it.  Mr.  Louis  Cabot  reports  warblers  as  uncom- 
mon at  North-east  Harbor,  Me.,  but  common  at  Grand 
River,  Can.  This  is  a  typical  report ;  but  some  few  observ- 
ers report  birds  generally  as  more  numerous  than  in  1903. 
Mr.  Outram  Bangs  tells  me  that  in  Wareham,  where,  he 
believes,  all  the  tree  swallows  were  killed  by  the  storms  in 
1903,  the  nesting-boxes  were  occupied  again  in  1904  by  this 
species,  probably  by  newcomers.  Chimney  swifts  are  re- 
ported quite  generally  as  absent,  rare  or  reduced  in  numbers. 
Mr.  Geo.  E.  Whitehead  of  Millbury  records  that  "  upward  of 
five  hundred  "  dead  swifts  were  taken  from  a  factory  chimney 
in  that  toAvn  in  1903  ;  and  that  during  the  season  of  1904 
he  watched  a  large  chimney  formerly  frequented  by  many 
swifts,  and  never  saw  one  enter  it.  In  my  own  experience, 
in  parts  of  Bristol,  Plymouth  and  Middlesex  counties  swifts 
were  either  much  reduced  or  rare  locally  throughout  the 
season  until  the  flight  in  August,  when  they  were  seen  in 
numbers  in  some  localities.  At  that  time,  one  afternoon,  I 
saw  about  thirty  birds  in  Billerica,  which  were  more  than 
I  had  seen  elsewhere ;  but  the  next  morning  only  one  was 
seen.  Messrs.  William  Brewster  and  Ralph  Hoffman  report 
.swifts  as  common  in  Cambridge  and  Belmont  respectively. 

The  birds  had  a  good  breeding  season  in  1904,  and  probably 
most  species  will  soon  recover  from  the  check  they  received 
by  the  June  storms  of  1903,  except,  perhaps,  the  purple 
martins,  which  seem  to  have  been  almost  absent  from  Mas- 
sachusetts in  the  breeding  season  of  1904.  Martins  were 
looked  for  in  April  as  usual.  A  few  birds  were  reported, 


432  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

unusually  early,  from  six  localities.  These  were  thought 
to  be  some  of  the  breeding  birds  which  had  escaped  the 
catastrophe  of  1903;  but  so  far  as  can  be  learned,  they  all 
disappeared.  Their  probable  fate  may  be  inferred  from  the 
story  of  ]\Irs.  Frank  H.  Watson  of  Concord. 

Mr.  Watson  has  two  large  bird-houses  which  have  been 
well  filled  with  martins  for  years,  but,  apparently,  the  birds 
all  died  during  the  storms  of  June,  1903.  Mrs.  Watson 
says  that  two  pairs  of  martins  came  to  the  boxes  earlier  in 
April,  1904,  than  usual,  but  were  not  seen  during,  or  after, 
the  cold  wave  and  snowstorm  which  followed  the  19th,  when 
some  five  inches  of  snow  fell.  Later,  Mr.  Watson  exam- 
ined the  bird-houses,  and  found  three  of  the  birds  dead 
within. 

Twenty-six  observers  from  the  different  counties  of  Mas- 
sachusetts report  majPlms^a^^a^vjin^^isappejared  ;  three  report 
them  as  nearly  extinct ;  five,  as  rare ;  eight,  as  rare  and  de- 
creasing; one,  "as  usual."  In  response  to  letters  of  in- 
quiry sent  out  later  to  these  and  others,  it  was  learned  that 
nearly  all  the  reports  referred  to  migrating  birds.  Further 
extensive  correspondence  leads  to  the  belief  that  we  have 
no  fully  authenticated  record  of  the  breeding  of  the  purple 
martin  in  Massachusetts  this  season,  except  in  five  localities. 
Mr.  Robert  O.  Morris  speaks  of  four  small  colonies  in  or 
near  Springfield,  which  are  still  in  existence,  but  one  of 
these  has  decreased  one-half  in  numbers.  Miss  Emily  B. 
Adams,  also  of  Springfield,  speaks  of  two  colonies,  prob- 
ably some  of  the  same,  but  says  the  birds  are  being  gradu- 
ally driven  from  their  boxes  by  the  English  sparrows.  Mr. 
F.  H.  Mosher  writes  from  Shawmut  post-office  in  New  Bed- 
ford that  a  single  pair  of  birds  reared  their  young  there. 
Mrs.  Mary  R.  Stanley  of  North  Attleborough,  in  the  same 
county,  and  near  the  Rhode  Island  line,  says  the  martins 
are  nearly  extinct  there,  but  are  still  breeding  at  West 
Attleborough,  where  her  brother  saw  two  birds  feeding  their 
young.  Col.  John  E.  Thayer  says  martins  are  still  breed- 
ing at  Lancaster ;  and  Mr.  William  Holden  states  that  a  few 
pairs  of  birds  occupied,  and  probably  bred  in,  one  bird- 
house  in  Leominster.  Capt.  A.  B.  C.  Dakin  of  Concord 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  433 

states  that  a  single  pair  of  martins  were  resident  at  a 
neighbor's  bird-house,  but  failed  to  raise  any  young.  This 
may  be  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  the  English  sparrows, 
wEichTare  notorious  for  killing  young  martins,  occupied  the 
same  domicile.  Mr.  Fred.  C.  Dodge  says  that  martins, 
which  arrived  ten  days  later  than  usual,  occupied  a  small 
nesting-box  near  his  house  in  Beverly,  and  thinks  they 
probably  bred. 

We  have  records,  therefore,  of  martins  breeding  in  but 
three  counties  in  the  State,  —  Hampden,  Bristol  and  Worces- 
ter, —  with  the  probability  that  they  bred  in  Essex  County. 

What  prospect  is  there  that  the  species  will  eventually 
increase  in  numbers,  and  reoccupy  its  old  breeding  places? 
It  seems  probable  (1)  that  some  martins  may  have  survived 
and  bred  in  places  not  reached  by  this  inquiry ;  the  few 
birds  left  may  form  the  nuclei  of  new  martin  colonies. 
Probably  also  (2)  martins  breeding  in  parts  of  northern 
New  England,  and  migrating  through  Massachusetts,  may, 
in  time,  overflow  into  this  State.  (3)  Martins  are  said  to 
be  breeding  still  in  Connecticut,  New  Hampshire  and  Rhode 
Island,  not  far  from  the  Massachusetts  line  ;  and  there  is 
some  probability  that  these  colonies  may  spread  over  our 
borders,  although  their  numbers  are  much  reduced.  Mr. 
Robert  Curtiss  of  Stratford,  Conn.,  where  martins  were 
abundant  in  the  spring  of  1903,  says  that  only  one  was  seen 
there  in  1904 ;  but  Mrs.  Mabel  Osgood  Wright  says  they 
are  still  breeding  at  Stamford.  Mr.  Morris  reports  that 
martins  are  numerous  at  Windsor  Locks,  Conn.,  about 
twelve  miles  south  of  Springfield,  Mass.,  and,  as  numbers 
of  them  probably  migrate  up  the  Connecticut  valley,  the 
repopulation  of  Massachusetts  by  martins  may  be  expected 
to  progress  as  rapidly  there  as  anywhere.  It  seemgjbo  be 
believed^however,  by  most  careful  observers  that  the  mar- 
tinsjwere  diminishing  in__Ma.ssachusetts  before  1903.  For 
this  decrease  the  English  sparrow  was  largely  responsible. 
The  sparrows  are  now  occupying  most  of  the  boxes  where 
the  martins  formerly  dwelt,  and,  when  firmly  intrenched 
therein,  they  may  be  able  to  prevent  the  martins  from  re- 
taking the  boxes.  On  the  other  hand,  the  decrease  of 


434  BOAKD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

martins  and  swallows  is  likely  to  be  followed  by  an 
increase  of  the  insects  on  which  they  feed.  This  will  prob- 
ably attract  these  birds  into  the  State,  and  favor  their  breed- 
ing ;  but,  unless  boxes  are  generally  put  up  for  the  martins, 
and  the  English  sparrows  kept  out,  the  martins  may  never 
again  become  common  in  Massachusetts.  The  June  storms 
of  1903  will  long  be  remembered  as  the  chief  cause  of  the 
passing  of  these  beautiful  and  useful  birds. 

'Thft  ftflfaftfr  flf  fthtt  hard  winter  of  li>03-04  upon  our  resi- 
dent birds  seems  not  to  have  been  very  serious  except  with 
a  few  species.  The  bob-white,  or  quail,  has  been  nearly  ex- 
terminated over  much  of  the  State.  The  ruffed  grouse,  or 
partridge,  although  considerably  reduced  in  many  sections, 
appears  to  have  bred  well  in  the  western  half  of  the  State 
in  1904,  and  has  done  well  locally  in  the  eastern  counties. 
Many  dead  blue  jays  were  found  during  the  winter,  and  in 
some  sections  jays,  crows  and  chickadees  seem  to  have  been 
much  reduced  in  numbers,  but  this  is  by  no  means  universal. 
I  found  jays  somewhat  reduced  in  Wareham ,  but  crows  had 
increased.  Both  crows  and  jays  were  considerably  reduced 
in  Concord,  while  chickadees  were  not  so  common  as  usual 
in  either  place.  Some  reports  from  south-eastern  Massa- 
chusetts indicate  a  scarcity  of  flickers  and  meadow  larks, 
but  this  is  seldom  noticed  elsewhere.  Screech  owls  suffered 
severely,  and  were  driven  by  stress  of  weather  into  barns 
and  dove-cotes,  where  they  fed  on  mice  and'~3oves.  Mr. 
A.  M.  Frazar,  the  Boston  taxidermist,  informs  me  that  he 
had  about  forty  of  these  birds  brought  to  him,  most  of 
which  had  been  taken  in  dove-cotes.  Some  were  picked  up 
dead.  He  also  received  about  twenty  Acadian  or  saw- whet 
owls,  that  were  found  dead  either  in  the  streets  of  Boston  or 
in  the  country  districts.  Many  observers  report  a  recent 
scarcity  of  screech  owls,  while  others  report  them  as  nu- 
merous. My  own  notes  show  them  to  have  been  rather 
rare  in  1904  where  in  1903  they  were  quite  common. 
Superintendent  Charles  P.  Price  of  the  Middlesex  Fells 
Reservation  found  several  barred  owls  apparently  frozen  to 
death  during  the  winter ;  they  were  fat,  and  therefore  had 
not  starved. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  435 

Evidently  the  bob- white  suffered  more  than  any  other  bird 
from  the  hard  winter  of  1903-04 ;  but  as  many  have  been 
introduced  since  by  the  Massachusetts  Fish  and  Game  Pro- 
tective Association,  and  others  were  carried  through  the 
winter  by  feeding,  there  are  birds  enough  now  to  restock 
the  State,  if  they  can  be  protected. 

It  is  fair  to  conclude,  therefore,  that,  excepting,  perhaps, 
the  purple  martin,  no  species  has  suffered  a  lasting  or  per- 
manent check  from  the  action  of  the  elements  in  1903  or 
1904. 

THE  EARLY  ABUXDAXCE  OF  BIRDS  ix  MASSACHUSETTS. 

No  investigation  into  the  decrease  of  birds  and  its  causes 
can  be  conducted  intelligently  without  some  knowledge  of 
the  relative  abundance  of  the  different  families  of  birds  at 
the  time  of  the  first  settlement  of  the  country.  Had  we 
any  full  and  trustworthy  account  of  the  animals  of  New 
England,  from  the  pen  of  some  naturalist  of  the  seventeenth 
century,  we  could  better  understand  the  changes  that  have 
occurred  in  the  bird  fauna  of  New  England  since  the  dis- 
covery of  the  country.  As  it  is,  we  must  derive  our  infor- 
mation from  the  brief,  fragmentary  and  rather  unsatisfactory 
accounts  written  by  some  of  the  early  voyagers  and  settlers. 
We  shall  learn  little  of  the  smaller  land  birds  of  the  coun- 
try from  these  narratives;  but  all  agree  that  there  was 
"  greate  store"  of  water  birds,  "sea  fowle"  and  game 
birds. 

rom  Archer's  relation  of  ' '  Captaine  Gosnol's  voyage  to 
the  north  part  of  ^^ynjftt"  rna.da  iu  1COO,  we  learn  that  the 
"  penguin  "  (great  auk)  was  found  on  our  shores.  This  bird 
evidently  was  once  abundant  at  certain  points  on  the  coast. 
Early  historians  refer  to  birds  now  extirpated  from  this 
region  as  then  existing  in  great  numbers.  Swans,  cranes, 
wild  turkeys,  snow  geese,  passenger  pigeons  and  other 
birds,  now  either  rare  or  extinct  here,  were  then  found  in 
great  abundance.  There  were  also  then,  as  now,  "divers 
sorts  of  singing  birds  whose  notes  salute  the  ears  of  travel- 
lers with  an  harmonious  discord." 

Capt.    John    Smith  credits  the  land  with  an  incredible 


43(5  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

abundance  of  fish,  fowl,  wild  fruits  and  good  timber. 
Francis  Iligginson  writes  :  "  Fowls  of  the  aire  are  plentiful 
here.  Here  are  likewise  aboundance  of  turkies  often  killed 
in  the  woods.  — This  country  doth  abound  with  wild  geese, 
wild  duckes,  and  other  sea  fowle,  that  a  great  part  of  the 
winter  the  planters  have  eaten  nothing  but  roastmeat  of 
divers  fowles  which  they  have  killed."  * 

Josselyn  writes  that  he  has  known  ' '  twelve  score  and 
more  of  sanderlins  "  to  be  killed  at  two  shots. f 

Morton  says  there  was  "  greate  store  "  of  swans  in  the 
Memmack  River  at  their  seasons,  also  "greate  store"  of 
cranes  in  the  country.  He  also  speaks  of  two  Indians  hav- 
ing seen  a  thousand  turkeys  in  less  than  a  day  in  the  woods.J 

AVilliam  "Woods  speaks  of  the  turkeys  as  being  in  flocks 
of  forty,  sixty  and  one  hundred  birds.  He  says  the  set- 
tlers shot,  for  their  own  use,  those  which  went  by  their 
doors.  He  speaks  of  vast  flocks  of  wild  pigeons  passing 
over  where  he  was,  and  of  "  seeing  neyther  the  beginning 
nor  ending,  length  or  breadth  of  these  Millions  of  Millions. 
The  shouting  of  the  people,  the  rattling  of  gunnes  and  the 
pelting  of  small  shotte  could  not  drive  them  out  of  their 
course  and  so  they  continued  for  four  or  five  houres  together." 
He  describes  great  flights  of  Brant,  gray  geese,  white  geese 
and  wild  ducks ;  and  says  the  gray  geese  stayed  all  winter 
in  these  waters,  while  the  others  were  seen  only  in  spring 
and  fall.  He  asserts  that  some  have  killed  a  hundred  geese 
in  a  week,  and  fifty  ducks  or  forty  teal  at  a  shot.  The 
"  humilities "  or  "simplicities"  as  he  calls  them,  referring 
to  shore  birds,  large  and  small,  could  be  driven  in  a  herd 
like  sheep,  and  shot  "  at  a  fit  time,"  after  which  the  living 
would  settle  again  among  the  dead.  "I  myself,"  he  says, 
"  have  killed  twelve  score  at  two  shootes." 

Morton  says  that  he  has  often  had  one  thousand  geese  be- 
fore the  muzzle  of  his  gun,  and  that  the  feathers  of  the  geese 
he  had  killed  in  a  short  time  paid  for  all  the  powder  and  shot 
he  would  use  in  a  year.  He  speaks  of  seeing  forty  "  par- 
tridges" in  one  tree  and  sixty  "quail"  in  another.  Un- 

*  "  New  England's  plantation,"  by  Francis  Higginson,  p.  11. 

f  "Account  of  two  voyages  to  New  England,"  1638-63,  by  J.  Josselyn. 

}  Morton's  "  New  English  Canaan,"  p.  74. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIKDS.  437 

doubtedly  these  were  the  same  species  that  are  now  gener- 
ally known  in  Massachusetts  by  these  vernacular  names. 

Geese  were  fed  to  the  dogs  and  pigeons  to  the  hogs ;  but, 
notwithstanding  the  great  waste  of  bird-life,  no  appreciable 
effect  on  the  abundance  of  the  birds  was  noticed  during  the 
first  years  of  settlement,  for  Woods  says  that,  in  spite  of 
the  shooting  and  the  ' '  frighting  of  the  fowle  "  .  .  .  "I  have 
seene  more,  living  and  dead,  the  last  yeare  than  I  have 
done  in  former  yeares."  * 

THE  DECREASE  OF  BIRDS  IN  PAST  CENTURIES. 

The  great  auk  soon  disappeared.  The  great  cranes,  both 
brown  and  white,  birds  of  the  open  country,  were  anni- 
hilated by  the  settler's  rifle.  The  Canada  goose,  which  was 
once  found  in  the  State  throughout  the  year,  and  probably 
bred  about  the  inland  ponds  and  marshes,  was  driven  out, 
and  became  a  mere  migrant  in  spring  and  fall.  The  wild 
turkey  and  heath  hen  were  hunted  away  to  the  deep  woods ; 
but  geese,  ducks,  shore  birds,  passenger  pigeons  and  ruffed 
grouse  still  existed  in  abundance  until  the  early  part  of  the 
nineteenth  century. 

An  old  gentleman  named  Greenwood,  a  responsible  man, 
who  was  once  keeper  of  the  Ipswich  Light,  told  me  in  1876 
that  in  the  early  part  of  the  century  (I  have  no  memo- 
randum of  the  date)  he,  with  his  father  and  brothers,  had 
to  get  oxen  and  sled  to  haul  home  the  birds,  mainly  geese 
and  ducks,  which  they  had  killed  in  one  day  about  Thanks- 
giving time  near  the  mouth  of  the  Ipswich  River. 

Dwight  tells  us,  in  182 l,f  that  there  were  then  hardly 
any  wild  animals  remaining  besides  a  few  small  species  ; 
that  wild  turkeys  had  greatly  lessened  in  numbers,  and  in 
the  most  populous  parts  of  the  country  were  not  very  often 
seen;  that  grouse  were  not  common,  but  that  water-fowl 
still  existed  in  great  abundance. 

This  brief  glance  at  two  centuries  of  the  history  of  Mas- 

*  William  "Woods'  "New  England's  prospect,"  from  which  this  was  taken, 
was  first  printed  in  London  in  1634. 

t  Dwight's  "Travels  in  New  England  and  New  York,"  1821,  Vol.  I.,  pp. 
52-65.  The  grouse  spoken  of  here  is  probably  the  heath  hen,  as  Dwight  and 
other  writers  mention  this  bird  as  the  grouse  or  pheasant,  —  a  bird  distinct  from 
the  partridge,  or  ruffed  grouse,  and  never  as  common. 


438  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

sachusetts  game  birds  and  their  destruction  brings  us  to  a 
time  within  the  memory  of  a  few  persons  now  living,  and 
almost  within  the  scope  of  the  present  inquiry. 

In  the  first  volume  of  the  "Memorial  History  of  Boston," 
published  in  1880,  Dr.  J.  A.  Allen,  one  of  the  most  emi- 
nent of  American  naturalists,  writes  of  the  birds  of  eastern 
Massachusetts  as  follows:  "The  great  auk,  the  Labrador 
duck,  and  five  or  six  other  species,  have  long  since  disap- 
peared from  southern  New  England.  All  the  larger  species 
and  many  of  the  shore  birds  have  greatly  decreased,  as  have 
likewise  most  of  the  smaller  forest  birds.  The  few  that 
haunt  cultivated  grounds  have  doubtless  nearly  maintained 
their  former  abundance." 

In  1898,  Director  William  T.  Hornaday,  of  the  New  York 
Zoological  Park,  made  an  inquiry  into  the  decrease  of  birds 
and  mammals  in  the  United  States.  He  estimated,  from 
reports  received  by  him  from  naturalists  in  many  parts  of 
the  country,  that  birds  had  decreased  on  the  average  46  per 
cent  in  thirty  States  and  Territories  within  the  fifteen  years 
then  just  past,  while  their  reduction  in  Massachusetts  was 
estimated  at  27  per  cent.  This  report  has  been  widely 
quoted,  and  very  generally  credited  by  the  public. 

THE  DIFFICULTY  OF  ACQUIRING  ACCURATE  INFORMATION. 

It  is  difficult  to  get  accurate  information  as  to  the  increase 
or  decrease  of  bird-life  in  a  region  so  large  as  the  State  of 
Massachusetts.  A  conclusion  one  way  or  the  other  cannot 
safely  be  formed  by  any  individual  unaided,  except  in  regard 
to  a  limited  territory  with  which  he  has  been  familiar  for  a 
series  of  years.  Such  a  conclusion,  when  formed,  is  merely 
an  opinion,  and  the  personal  equation  inevitably  comes  in 
to  bias  it.  Some  people  are  naturally  optimistic,  and  their 
reports  show  it;  or  they  have  recently  begun  to  study 
birds,  and  see  more  of  them  now  than  in  former  years. 
Others  are  pessimistic,  or  have  become  imbued  with  the 
popular  belief  that  our  birds  are  rapidly  being  exterminated. 
Some  are  elderly  people,  who  do  not,  perhaps,  see  nor  hear 
so  clearly  as  in  their  youth,  and  are  not  so  much  afield,  and 
so  do  not  notice  so  many  birds  as  in  their  younger  days. 


No.  4.] 


DECREASE   OF   BIRDS. 


439 


Some  reports  coine  from  closely  populated  regions,  where 
many  causes  operate  to  destroy  or  drive  out  the  birds ; 
others  come  from  more  sparsely  peopled  regions,  where  the 
birds  and  their  natural  enemies  are  not  so  much  interfered 
with.  These  personal  or  environmental  differences  tend  to 
produce  contradictory  reports.  Where  there  is  conflicting 
testimony,  it  must  be  carefully  weighed,  and  all  contradic- 
tions considered  by  the  one  who  has  to  render  the  final  ver- 
dict. In  this,  the  evidence  of  those  experts  who  for  years 
have  kept  careful  notes  of  the  number  of  birds  seen  should 
have  the  most  weight. 

A  SUMMARY  OF  REPORTS,  BY  COUNTIES. 
Below  is  a  summary,  by  counties,  of  the  reports  regard- 
ing the  gain  or  loss  in  numbers  of  birds  in  the  State  for 
the  past  ten  to  forty  years.     The  questions  asked  were  :  — 


Map  of  Massachusetts,  marked  to  show  the  localities  from  which  reports  have 
been  received. 

1.  Are  birds  decreasing  in  your  locality,  county,  or  in  the 
State  generally  ? 

2.  How  do  their  numbers  compare  with  those  of  ten  years 
ago?     Three-fourths  as  many,  one-half,  one-third,  or  do  they 
remain  about  the  same  ? 

3.  Has   the   decrease  (if  any)  been  continuing  for  twenty, 
thirty  or  forty  years,  or  longer  ? 


440 


BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 


Some  correspondents  failed  to  answer  these  questions, 
and  others,  answered  rather  indefinitely.  The  definite 
answers  received  are  tabulated  below.  Seventy-three  of 
those  who  regard  birds  generally  as  diminishing  in  num- 
bers estimate  the  percentage  of  decrease  as  follows  :  one, 
10  per  cent;  one,  12^  percent;  twenty-one,  25  per  cent; 
one,  30  per  cent ;  six,  33^  per  cent ;  thirty-three,  50  per 
cent;  five,  G6|  per  cent;  three,  75  per  cent;  two,  90  per 
cent.  Eleven  state  that  birds  are  decreasing  somewhat,  but 
give  no  estimate  of  the  percentage ;  those  also  who  regard 
birds  in  general  as  increasing  give  no  percentages.  It  is  im- 
possible, therefore,  with  the  figures  at  hand,  to  arrive  at  the 
average  opinion  as  to  the  percentage  of  decrease  of  the  birds 
in  the  State,  to  say  nothing  of  the  facts  in  the  case.  To 
get  at  even  an  approximation  of  the  facts,  other  methods 
must  be  employed. 

The  table  shows  that  a  large  share  of  the  reports  were 
pessimistic,  and  on  its  face,  perhaps,  presents  a  darker 
picture  than  the  facts  will  warrant. 

A  Tabulated  Statement,  by  Counties,  of  the  Reports  regarding  the 
Decrease  of  Birds. 


COUHTT. 

Number 
reporting 
that  Birds  are 
decreasing. 

Number 
reporting 
thatBirdsare 
holding 
their  Own. 

Number  reporting  that 
Game  Birds 
are  decreasing  and 
Song  Birds 
increasing  or  holding 
their  Own. 

Number 
reporting 
Birds 
increasing. 

Berkshire,     . 

9 

1 

3 

Hampshire,  . 

6 

4 

1 

- 

Hampden, 

8 

6 

1 

1 

Franklin,       . 

3 

5 

1 

_ 

Worcester,    . 

20 

8 

2 

1 

Middlesex,    . 

17 

6 

4 

5 

Essex,  .... 

12 

4 

4 

2 

Norfolk, 

5 

4 

1 

1 

Suffolk, 

4 

1 

- 

1 

Barnstable,    . 

2 

- 

- 

- 

Plymouth,     . 

5 

2 

1 

2 

Bristol, 

3 

6 

1 

1 

Dukes,           .         . 

_ 

1 

- 

_ 

Nantucket,     . 

- 

- 

1 

- 

Total  for  State, 

94 

48 

20 

14 

No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  441 

It  will  be  seen  by  the  above  table  that  ninety-four  corre- 
spondents report  birds  as  decreasing ;  only  sixty -two  report 
them  as  either  holding  their  own  or  increasing.  If  we  add 
to  this  number,  however,  the  twenty  who  regard  game  birds 
or  other  larger  species  as  diminishing,  and  song  birds  or  the 
smaller  species  as  stationary  or  increasing,  we  shall  have 
eighty-two  who  believe  that  the  smaller  species  are  either 
stationary  or  increasing,  against  ninety-four  who  believe  all 
birds  are  decreasing.  Xext,  we  find  that  forty-three  who 
report  birds  as  rapidly  diminishing  live  in  or  near  the  larger 
cities,  where  the  principal  causes  of  this  diminution  are 
most  active.  There  are,  then,  only  fifty-one  persons,  out- 
side of  the  influence  of  the  cities,  who  find  birds  generally 
decreasing,  to  eighty-two  who  find  the  smaller  birds  at  least 
holding  their  own.  This  being  the  case,  it  seems  probable 
that  the  smaller  birds  in  general  have  not  decreased  greatly 
in  Massachusetts,  as  a  whole,  in  recent  years,  except  in 
and  near  the  centres  of  population.  Undoubtedly  there  are 
fluctuations  in  the  numbers  of  certain  species  over  large 
areas.  There  are  also  local  fluctuations  in  the  numbers  of 
most  species.  Certain  birds  will  be  rare  in  a  locality  for 
a  year  or  two,  and  then,  perhaps,  plentiful  again.  The  re- 
ports plainly  show  such  oscillations ;  but  it  may  be  doubted 
if  there  is  any  great  and  general  decrease  in  all  the  smaller 
species. 

Mr.  Hornaday,  by  pursuing  a  similar  method  of  inquiry 
six  years  ago,  arrived  at  a  somewhat  different  conclusion. 
How  can  this  discrepancy  be  explained?  In  the  first  place, 
Mr.  Hornaday  apparently  based  his  Massachusetts  report  on 
the  statements  of  only  eleven  people,  as  against  those  of  two 
hundred  who  have  responded  to  the  present  inquiry.  In 
the  second  place,  seven  out  of  his  eleven  correspondents 
lived  in  or  near  cities,  where  birds  were,  or  had  been,  de- 
creasing. 

But  it  may  be  said  that  the  testimony  taken  by  him  was 
more  in  the  nature  of  selected  expert  evidence  than  that 
obtained  in  the  present  inquiry.  To  meet  this  objection, 
extracts  from  thirty-five  reports  have  been  selected.  These 
observers  may  be  said  to  belong  to  the  same  class  as  those 


442  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

from  whom  Mr.  Hornaday  received  his  information.  The 
names  of  three  of  his  correspondents  appear  in  this  list. 
Circulars  were  sent  to  the  other  eight,  but  they  failed  to 

return  them. 

EXPERT  EVIDENCE. 

Nantucket  County.  —  Mr.  George  H.  Mackay  of  Boston, 
well  known  as  an  authority  on  Massachusetts  sea-fowl,  wild- 
fowl and  shore  birds,  who  is  very  familiar  with  Nantucket, 
says  that  shore  birds  generally  are  decreasing ;  some  species 
have  fallen  off  from  66  per  cent  to  98  per  cent  in  sixty 
years.  Other  species  have  not  decreased  so  much,  or  re- 
main about  the  same.  He  has  noticed  no  general  decrease 
among  the  smaller  land  birds. 

Bristol  County.  —  Mr.  F.  H.  Mosher  of  Dartmouth  re- 
ports that  some  species  are  decreasing,  others  remain  about 
the  same,  and  a  few  seem  to  be  increasing.  He  says  the 
decrease  of  certain  species  has  been  progressing  for  at  least 
twenty  years.  Mr.  Arthur  C.  Bent  of  Taunton  says  that, 
generally  speaking,  birds  are  not  materially  decreasing.  In 
some  few  cases  they  are,  but  the  numbers  remain  about  the 
same  as  a  whole.  Mr.  Elisha  Slade  of  Somerset  says  that 
in  his  locality  practically  all  native  species  are  decreasing. 
The  decrease  has  been  continuing  spasmodically,  he  says, 
for  forty  years.  He  estimates  the  falling  off  of  certain  spe- 
cies within  thirty  years  as  follows  :  quail,  ruffed  grouse, 
herons  and  night-hawks,  50  per  cent ;  mourning  doves, 
purple  martins  and  house  wrens,  75  per  cent ;  bank  swal- 
lows, barn  swallows,  flickers,  swifts,  warblers  and  thrushes, 
30  per  cent. 

Plymouth  County. — Mr.  Arthur  Curtis  Dyke  of  Bridge- 
water  reports  some  species  as  certainly  decreasing.  Among 
these  he  mentions,  mainly,  swallows,  birds  of  prey,  game 
birds  and  wild-fowl.  Mr.  Rufus  H.  Carr  of  Brockton  says  : 
"  Not  appreciably  decreasing,  except  certain  species.  Game 
birds  and  herons,  one-third  ;  hawks  and  owls,  one-fourth." 

Norfolk  County. — Mr.  Henry  B.  Bigelow  of  Cohasset 
says :  "I  believe  that  birds  are  decreasing  only  slightly  in 
this  locality.  There  is  a  great  yearly  variation  in  numbers. 
A  great  decrease  in  shore  birds  and  water-fowl  took  place 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF    BIRDS.  443 

about  five  years  ago."  Mr.  Frank  Blake  Webster  of  Hyde 
Park  writes  :  "I  see  no  decrease  in  twenty  years.  Wood- 
cock seem  scarce."  Mr.  I.  Chester  Horton  of  Canton  be- 
lieves that  quail,  grouse,  screech  owls,  purple  martins, 
house  wrens,  barn  swallows,  whip-poor-wills  and  indigo 
birds  are  diminishing,  while  bluebirds  are  increasing.  Mr. 
R.  M.  Baldwin  of  Wellesley  Hills  writes  that  in  Wellesley 
there  is  a  marked  decrease  in  larger  birds,  a  possible  in- 
crease in  the  smaller.  Mr.  F.  H.  Kennard  of  Brookline 
says  :  "In  Brookline  they  are  decreasing ;  swallows  driven 
out  by  building  up  of  town." 

Suffolk  County.  —  Mr.  Homer  Lane  Bigelow  of  Boston 
says  that  from  1889  to  1897  there  was  an  annual  decrease, 
but  since  then,  with  exceptions  (i.e.,  1903),  there  has 
been  a  gradual  increase.  Mr.  F.  H.  Allen  of  Boston  ex- 
presses a  disbelief  in  any  general -decrease  in  the  number  of 
birds  in  the  region  he  is  best  acquainted  with,  although  cer- 
tain species  are  driven  out  of  their  accustomed  haunts  by 
the  extension  of  city  influences  into  the  country,  the  cut- 
ting down  of  woods,  etc.  Mr.  C.  S.  Day  of  Boston,  who 
is  also  acquainted  with  conditions  in  Chathamport,  Barn- 
stable  County,  says  birds  are  decreasing.  "  I  should  judge 
about  one-half.  I  have  noticed  the  decrease  particularly 
the  last  fifteen  years."  Hawks,  owls,  the  swallow  family, 
game  birds,  the  house  wren,  the  swift  and  shore  birds  are 
the  birds  most  particularly  mentioned  as  decreasing. 

Essex  County.  —  Mr.  F.  C.  Dodge  of  Beverly  says  that 
in  the  last  three  years  there  has  been  an  increase,  previous 
to  that  a  decrease.  He  says  there  are  not  so  many  birds  in 
the  city  as  formerly,  but  about  the  same  number  in  the 
nearby  country.  (All  observers  but  one  from  Beverly  re- 
port some  increase  in  birds  there.)  Mr.  Reginald  C.  Rob- 
bins  of  Boston  states  that,  in  Essex  County,  wilderness  birds 
only  are  decreasing ;  suburban  birds  remain  about  the  same  ; 
others  fast  decreasing  locally,  but  holding  their  own  in 
favorable  spots.  Mr.  J.  A.  Farley  says:  «*  Speaking  from 
ten  years'  experience  in  certain  towns  in  southern  Essex 
County,  should  say,  on  the  whole,  birds  remain  about  the 
same ;  horned  owls,  sharp-shinned  hawks  and  red-tailed 


444  BOAKD   OF   AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

hawks  are  a  good  deal  reduced."  Dr.  Charles  W.  Town- 
send,  from  twenty-eight  years'  experience,  mainly  in  two 
towns  in  Essex  County,  concludes  that  shore  birds  have 
decreased  considerably  ;  but,  notwithstanding  smaller  birds 
have  decreased  about  the  cities,  they  are  holding  their  own 
very  well  in  the  country. 

Middlesex  County.  —  Mr.  C.  J.  Maynard  of  Newtonville, 
a  field  naturalist  of  many  years'  experience,  says:  "Many 
species  have  decreased  at  least  one-half.  Some  hold  their 
own.  A  few  have  considerably  increased.  Excepting  in  a 
few  species,  I  do  not  see  much  decrease  in  the  last  ten 
years.  Swallows  are  going  fast."  Mr.  Ralph  Hoffman  of 
Belmont  writes  :  "  The  larger  birds  (hawks,  herons,  grouse) 
are  decreasing;  the  smaller  birds  are  about  the  same. 
Grouse  no  longer  occur."  Mr.  Philip  T.  Coolidge  of 
Watertown  writes :  "  Some  species  are  decreasing.  Fully 
three-fourths  as  many  birds  as  ten  years  ago.  Bob- whites, 
hawks,  the  larger  owls,  ducks,  shore  birds,  gulls  and  terns 
suffer  much  from  shooting."  Mr.  E.  F.  Holden  of  Melrose 
says  :  "  Birds  have  decreased  within  ten  years,  also  within 
two  years  ;  perhaps  three-fourths  as  many  as  ten  years  ago, 
possibly  less."  Mr.  William  Brewster  of  Cambridge  and 
Concord,  the  leading  ornithologist  of  New  England,  who 
has  been  afield  much  for  the  past  forty  years,  says  :  "  Birds 
do  not  appear  to  be  decreasing  generally,  but  there  has 
been  a  decrease  among  swallows,  martins,  nighthawks,  game 
birds,  birds  of  prey,  certain  water-fowl  and  waders.  I 
should  say  that  the  decrease  in  woodcock,  partridges, 
wood  ducks,  certain  other  of  the  ducks  and  many  of  the 
waders  (plover,  sandpipers,  etc.)  had  been  continuing  ever 
since  I  can  remember,  or  upwards  of  forty  years."  Mr.  C. 
E.  Bailey  of  North  Billerica  says  that  birds  are  much  re- 
duced in  numbers  in  his  locality.  Miss  Elizabeth  S.  Hill 
of  Groton,  who  has  kept  a  careful  annual  record,  says  that 
some  birds  are  increasing  and  some  decreasing,  but  that  for 
the  past  ten  years  the  per  cent  of  increase  is  the  larger. 
Her  list  shows  that  the  principal  decrease  is  found  among 
the  herons,  ducks  and  birds  of  prey ;  the  increase  is  mainly 
among  the  smaller  species. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  445 

Worcester  County. — Dr.  C.  F.  Hodge  of  Worcester  re- 
ports birds  as  increasing  rapidly  on  his  premises,  and  he 
believes  there  are  more  in  the  city  than  three  or  four  years 
ago.  Dr.  Hodge  is  a  professor  in  Clark  University,  and  a 
leader  in  nature  study  at  Worcester.  He  takes  a  careful 
bird  census  each  year,  destroys  the  English  sparrows  and 
other  enemies  of  birds,  puts  up  bird-houses,  feeds  birds, 
and  teaches  the  children  not  to  molest  them, — all  of  which 
may  account  for  the  increase  of  birds  in  his  vicinity.  Mr. 
William  S.  Perry  of  Worcester,  who  has  had  a  long  experi- 
ence as  a  field  ornithologist,  sportsman  and  teacher,  and 
who  is  familiar  with  many  towns  in  northern  Worcester 
County,  says:  "Some  species  have  remained  about  the 
same  for  the  last  thirty  years ;  others  are  exterminated  ; 
others  are  decreased  one-half.  Most  show  decrease,  some 
increase."  Dr.  Lemuel  F.  Woodward  of  Worcester,  whose 
observations  have  extended  over  more  than  thirty  years, 
believes  that  hawks,  owls,  eagles,  game  birds,  nighthawks, 
swallows,  warblers  and  thrushes  are  decreasing.  Col.  John 
E.  Thayer  of  Lancaster  writes  that  he  has  been  in  the  woods 
nearly  every  day  between  March  15  and  July  1  for  the  past 
eight  years.  He  says  that,  with  the  exception  of  four  spe- 
cies, birds  have  not  decreased  in  his  locality.  Mr.  Charles 
E.  Ingalls  of  East  Templeton,  who  has  had  a  large  experi- 
ence as  a  field  observer,  and  has  travelled  much  about  the 
State,  says  that  birds  are  decreasing  in  his  town,  county  and 
State.  He  says  a  gradual  decrease  has  been  apparent  for 
thirty  or  more  years,  accelerated  during  the  last  ten  years. 
Mr.  C.  E.  Stone  of  Lunenburg  believes  that  insectivorous 
birds  are  rather  on  the  increase.  "A  few  species,  notably 
the  game  birds,  are  not  as  plentiful  as  formerly." 

Hampshire  Count//. — I  have  received  no  report  from  any 
ornithologist  in  this  county,  so  present  the  reports  of  ob- 
servers in  whose  judgment  I  have  confidence.  Prof.  Wm. 
P.  Brooks  of  Amherst  writes  :  "  Should  say  birds  are  not 
decreasing  in  this  vicinity."  Dr.  H.  T.  Fernald,  also  of 
Amherst,  having  consulted  with  Prof.  R.  F.  Nelligan  in 
regard  to  game  birds,  believes  there  is  some  decrease,  but 
assigns  the  weather  as  one  cause. 


446  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

Ilampden  County.  —  Mr.  Robert  O.  Morris  of  Spring- 
field says  that,  generally,  birds  are  not  decreasing  in  his 
vicinity.  He  speaks  of  a  decrease  in  owls,  hawks  and 
herons.  Mr.  F.  H.  Scott  of  Westfield  thinks  birds  are  not 
decreasing  there.  ' '  Some  years  ago  a  scarcity  of  some  of 
the  smaller  birds  was  apparent ;  recently  there  lias  been  an 
increase  among  many." 

Berkshire  County.  —  Mr.  J.  M.  Van  Huyck  of  Lee  thinks 
birds  are  decreasing,  but  the  decrease  is  assigned  mainly  to 
the  larger  species ;  the  smaller  species  seemingly  are  on  the 
increase.  Hawks,  owls,  eagles,  game  birds  and  herons  have 
decreased  much,  according  to  his  observations. 

On  the  whole,  the  above-mentioned  observers  apparently 
have  not  seen  a  great  decrease  in  the  numbers  of  the  smaller 
birds  except  in  the  case  of  a  few  species ;  but  the  older 
observers  record  a  considerable  diminution  within  forty 
to  sixty  years  among  game  birds,  water-fowl  and  shore 
birds. 

My  own  experience  as  a  resident  of  the  suburbs  of 
Worcester  and  Boston,  if  taken  alone,  might  lead  me  to 
believe  that  the  smaller  native  birds  have  fallen  off  much 
within  the  last  thirty  years  throughout  the  State,  as  they 
certainly  have  in  those  cities ;  but  in  many  of  the  country 
districts  I  find  the  majority  of  the  smaller  species  still  in 
nearly  the  same  numbers  as  thirty  years  ago.  I  do  not  find 
small  birds  as  numerous  in  Plymouth  and  Bristol  counties, 
or  in  sections  of  Middlesex  County,  as  they  were  in  Worces- 
ter County  thirty  years  ago.  The  fertile  soil  of  Worcester, 
one  of  the  richest  agricultural  counties  in  the  world,  sup- 
ports more  birds  to  the  acre  than  the  sandy  soil  of  Plymouth 
and  Bristol  counties,  or  the  gravelly  hills  of  some  parts  of 
Middlesex.  The  large  number  of  cities  in  eastern  Massa- 
chusetts, with  their  ever-increasing  population  flooding  the 
surrounding  country,  must  have  had  a  seriously  restrictive 
effect  on  the  bird-life  of  this  section.  No  one  will  question 
the  fact  that  the  sum  of  bird-life  must  have  been  somewhat 
reduced  in  this  region  by  the  growth  and  expansion  of  the 
cities,  and  the  destructive  and  repellent  forces  which  radiate 
from  them  into  the  surrounding  country ;  but,  outside  of  a 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  447 

certain  radius  from  each  city,  the  conditions  of  bird-life  still 
remain  much  the  same  (for  most  of  the  smaller  species)  as 
they  were  in  much  of  the  city  itself  forty  years  ago.  This 
may  be  illustrated  by  the  experience  of  Dr.  L.  F.  Wood- 
ward of  Worcester.  He  says  :  "I  am  confining  my  obser- 
vations of  bird-life  to  two  localities :  first,  my  home  in  the 
centre  of  the  city  of  Worcester ;  second,  the  grounds  and 
adjacent  country  about  the  Quinsigamond  Boat  Club  at 
Lake  Quinsigamond.  First,  the  city.  Thirty  years  ago, 
robins,  catbirds,  tree  swallows,  chipping  sparrows,  vireos 
and  summer  warblers  built  in  our  garden  ;  now,  nothing 
builds  about  the  site  of  the  house  but  the  robins  and  chip- 
ping sparrows.  For  three  years  no  young  robins  have  been 
raised  in  our  yard.  The  sparrows  either  destroy  the  nests, 
or  the  cats  get  the  birds.  The  chimney  swifts,  which  for- 
merly were  fairly  abundant  about  the  site,  are  very  much 
diminished,  also  the  nighthawk.  Second,  at  the  Quinsiga- 
mond boat  club  grounds  the  English  sparrows  were  abso- 
lutely exterminated  three  years  ago,  and  are  not  a  factor  in 
bird-life  in  that  particular  region.  The  birds  as  a  whole 
have  become  rather  more  numerous  and  much  tamer  than 
formerly.  The  white-breasted  swallows,  having  abundant 
house  accommodation,  have  increased,  but  this  year  have 
rather  decreased.  The  chimney  swifts,  once  quite  numer- 
ous, were  reduced  this  year  to  three  individuals.  Locally, 
the  thrasher,  veery  and  chewink  have  increased,  as  has  also 
the  field  sparrow.  The  whip-poor-will,  common  up  to  three 
years  ago,  has  practically  disappeared  ;  and  the  king-bird, 
of  which  we  have  always  had  several  pairs,  has  not  appeared 
on  our  grounds  this  year.  The  grackles  have  markedly  in- 
creased about  the  lake,  while  the  red-wings  have  diminished. 
The  purple  martin  disappeared  from  the  city  of  Worcester, 
so  far  as  I  know,  a  year  ago.  I  have  talked  with  several 
good  observers,  none  of  whom  has  seen  a  single  individual 
of  this  species  this  year.  The  mourning  dove  probably 
nested  at  the  lake  this  year,  as  I  have  seen  individuals  occa- 
sionally during  the  spring  and  summer.  This  is  the  first 
time  I  have  seen  this  bird  for  nearly  twenty  years.  The 
spotted  sandpiper  has  diminished.  All  birds  have  been  pro- 


448  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

tected  from  sparrows  and  cats,  but  not  from  grackles,  crows, 
blue  jays  and  other  wild  birds.  I  should  say  that  numer- 
ically the  birds  were  holding  their  own  in  that  particular 
locality,  but  that  individual  species  fluctuated,  some  years 
particular  birds  being  numerous,  while  others  which  seem  to 
be  subjected  to  about  the  same  perils  are  rare." 

As  an  epitome  of  bird-life,  and  the  contrasting  conditions 
affecting  it  in  the  city  and  country,  Dr.  Woodward's  report 
is  noteworthy.  The  main  causes  of  the  decrease  of  birds  in 
the  city  are  exhibited,  and  the  reduction  of  the  birds  in  the 
city  with  their  comparative  abundance  in  the  near-by  coun- 
try is  made  plain.  In  the  one  case  the  birds  were  subjected 
to  city  influences ;  in  the  other  they  were  protected  from 
them,  and  given  opportunity  for  breeding.  The  results  in 
the  latter  case  are  obvious.  A  notable  effect  of  the  June 
storms  of  1903  is  apparent  in  the  diminution  of  tree  swal- 
lows, the  extermination  of  the  martins,  and,  possibly,  also 
in  the  decrease  of  the  whip-poor-wills,  red-wings  and  king- 
birds. The  fluctuations  of  species  from  year  to  year  may 
be  owing  to  natural  causes  operative  everywhere,  or  to  the 
malign  influences  emanating  from  the  city  not  far  away. 
He  offers  no  explanation,  but  states  the  facts.  They  form 
the  text  for  a  treatise  on  bird  protection. 

In  the  development  of  our  civilization  there  have  been 
evolved  or  introduced  certain  influences  destructive  to  bird- 
life,  such  as  trolley  cars,  improved  firearms  and  the  English 
sparrow.  Taking  such  forces  into  consideration,  together 
with  the  growth  of  cities,  it  is  possible,  perhaps,  that  we 
now  have  fewer  of  the  smaller  native  birds  in  the  State  than 
forty  years  ago.  Many  of  the  larger  species  have  been 
decreasing  steadily.  Along  the  coasts  and  in  the  densely 
populated  regions,  game  birds,  many  shore  birds  and  some 
water-fowl  have  lessened  to  such  an  extent  that  they  are 
evidently  doomed  to  extermination,  unless  better  protected. 
So  far  I  must  agree  with  those  who  believe  that  our  birds 
are  being  extirpated.  But  we  must  guard  against  too  much 
pessimism.  It  is  quite  natural  to  remember  the  times  in 
our  youth  when  birds  were  very  numerous,  and  forget  the 
seasons  when  they  were  comparatively  few.  So  one  re- 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  449 

members  the  cold  winters  and  severe  snowstorms  of  his 
childhood,  and  forgets  the  mild  seasons.  Similarly  it 
seems,  as  we  look  back,  that  we  had  many  tremendous 
flights  of  warblers  in  those  days,  but  the  records  show 

•/       ' 

very  few. 

Mr.  Abbot  H.  Thayer  of  Monadnock,  N.  H.,  where  many 
of  the  repressive  forces  which  exist  in  eastern  Massachusetts 
are  almost  unknown,  who  takes  a  very  optimistic  view  of 
the  matter,  says  that  asking  the  public,  or  even  so-called 
ornithologists,  whether  they  find  birds  diminished,  is  as  de- 
ceptive in  its  results  as  a  look  at  the  telegraph  poles  along  a 
road.  Just  where  the  observer  stands  there  is  one  pole  or 
none,  while  a  glance  back  down  the  road  reveals  a  massed 
accumulation  one  against  another,  — all  due  to  perspective. 
One's  past,  he  says,  is  so  well  stocked  with  so  many  remem- 
bered sights  of  rare  and  beautiful  birds  that  only  a  very 
philosophical  mind  can  escape  the  impression  that  birds 
were  formerly  constantly  in  sight,  whereas  one  really  saw 
few  in  some  seasons,  as  is  the  case  to-day. 

Lest  the  conditions  in  Massachusetts  regarding  the  smaller 
birds  might  prove  exceptional,  and  the  results  of  the  inves- 
tigation misleading,  the  inquiry  has  been  extended  somewhat 
into  other  populous  States  of  the  Atlantic  seaboard.  The 
reports  seem  to  indicate  that  with  some  exceptions  the 
smaller  birds  are  not  generally  decreasing  in  numbers  in 
those  States.  Extracts  from  reports  of  some  of  the  most 
competent  observers  are  given  below. 

Mr.  C.  J.  Pennock,  ornithologist  to  the  Pennsylvania 
State  Board  of  Agriculture,  says  that  birds  are  probably  de- 
creasing, but  not  to  any  great  extent,  except  a  few  species. 
He  mentions  the  dickcissel,  purple  martin,  ruffed  grouse 
and  bob-white  as  species  that  have  been  decreasing  for  many 
years,  and  the  house  wren  as  increasing  in  his  locality 
(Kennet  Square,  Pa.). 

Mr.  Frank  M.  Chapman,  assistant  curator  of  the  depart- 
ment of  birds  in  the  American  Museum  of  Natural  History, 
writes  from  his  home,  Englewood,  N.  J.  :  "Birds  remain 
about  the  same,  except  bobolinks,  which  have  been  exter- 
minated locally  ;  the  larger  kawks  and  owls,  which  decrease 


450  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

with  the  disappearance  of  the  woodland  ;  game  birds,  includ- 
ing doves  and  wild  fowl ;  eave  or  cliff  swallows,  which  have 
disappeared  locally  as  breeders;  and  tree  swallows,  which 
are  possibly  less  abundant  as  migrants." 

President  Theodore  Roosevelt,  who  is  an  accurate  observer 
of  animal  life,  writes  from  his  home  on  Long  Island,  N.  Y.  : 
"  Here  at  Oyster  Bay  niy  observations  have  gone  over  thirty- 
one  years.  During  that  time  I  do  not  believe  there  has  been 
any  diminution  in  the  number  of  birds,  as  a  whole.  Quail 
and  woodcock  are  not  as  plentiful  as  they  were ;  I  am  in- 
clined to  think  that  last  winter  may  have  been  hard  on  quail 
around  here.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  there  are  one  or  two 
other  wild  birds  that,  I  think,  have  increased  in  numbers." 
Later  he  wrote,  in  response  to  an  inquiry  regarding  the 
shore  birds:  "During  my  time  there  have  never  been  any 
but  scattering  shore  birds  in  my  neighborhood  on  the  north 
shore  of  Long  Island,  and  there  are  now  as  many  of  these 
as  there  ever  were.  During  the  same  period  there  has  been 
a  great  diminution  in  the  shore  birds,  once  so  plentiful,  in 
the  Great  South  Bay  on  the  south  shore  of  Long  Island  ;  as 
I  happen  to  know,  because  my  uncle  lives  there." 

Mrs.  Mabel  Osgood  Wright  of  Fan-field,  Conn.,  says  that, 
speaking  locally  for  Fairfield  and  ten  miles  inland,  some 
species  have  decreased,  others  have  held  their  own.  The 
great  horned  owl  is  nearly  extinct.  Wood  ducks  have  be- 
come very  rare  within  ten  years ;  also  mourning  doves ; 
scarlet  tanagers  and  shore  birds  in  general  have  decreased. 

Mr.  E.  Hart  Geer,  secretary  of  the  Connecticut  Commis- 
sion of  Fisheries  and  Game,  writes  that  shore  birds  have 
decreased  greatly,  and  that  river  ducks  have  decreased  every 
year.  He  says  there  was  as  good  a  flight  during  the  fall 
of  1904  as  was  consistent  with  the  "  extermination  due  to 
unrestricted  shooting." 

Mr.  Harry  Hathaway  writes  from  Providence,  R.  I.  :  "The 
shore  birds,  game  birds,  hawks  and  owls  are  decreasing  in 
the  State  generally,  but  no  appreciable  decrease  is  occurring 
in  other  species,  and  some  few  species  are  increasing  in  num- 
bers." He  says  that  a  fair  estimate  of  the  decrease  of  the 
birds  named  would  be  one-half  in  fifteen  years,  but  that  this 
may  be  too  large,  as  his  observations  have  been  "  locally 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  451 

restricted."  Hawks  and  owls  have  been  driven  off,  he  says, 
by  the  removal  of  their  nesting  sites.  This  was  very  evi- 
dent after  the  coal  strike  in  the  spring  of  1902,  when  much 
wood  was  cut.  A  law  passed  by  the  Legislature,  offering  a 
bounty  on  hawks,  owls  and  crows,  also  has  had  some  effect. 

Mr.  Abbot  H.  Thayer  of  Monadnock,  N.  H.,  writes : 
"Ever  since  Hornaday's  announcement  I  have  done  my  best 
to  know  the  truth  about  this  region.  Now,  nearly  fifty  years 
later  than  when  I  first  knew  Keene,  N.  H.,  every  wet  spot 
has  the  same  red-winged  blackbirds,  .  .  .  every  mowing 
its  bobolinks,  and  all  the  village  birds  are  as  abundant  in  a 
general  way  as  forty-eight  years  ago.  ...  I  believe  that 
the  only  species  that  have  suffered  any  significant  change 
are  the  passenger  pigeon,  upland  plover  and  wood  duck ; 
also  the  ruffed  grouse  and  the  bobolink  (as  I  am  told,  not 
as  I  notice  here)."  The  upland  plover  he  regards  as  near- 
ing  extinction,  and  the  purple  martin  as  occupying  fewer 
bird-houses  than  formerly. 

Dr.  G.  H.  Perkins  of  the  University  of  Vermont,  ento- 
mologist of  the  Vermont  State  Experiment  Station,  Burling- 
ton, writes:  "I  think,  on  the  contrary,  many  birds  are 
increasing.  Birds  are  well  protected,  and  I  think  few  are 
intentionally  killed  in  the  State.  I  should  say  there  has 
been  no  decrease,  as  a  whole.  Going  back  fifty  years  ago, 
if  accounts  are  to  be  trusted,  the  wild  pigeon  and  some 
others  were  more  abundant  than  of  late.  Swallows,  swifts, 
song  sparrows,  robins,  bluebirds,  redstarts,  vireos,  white- 
crowned  sparrows,  bobolinks,  many  warblers,  meadowlarks, 
downy  and  hairy  woodpeckers  and  creepers  do  not  seem  to 
decrease,  if  not  increasing." 

Mrs.  Elizabeth  B.  Davenport  of  Brattleboro,  Vt.,  says 
that  birds  are  not  decreasing,  as  a  whole.  Grouse  are 
reported  less  in  number,  the  martins  are  decimated  and  the 
house  wrens  are  sadly  decreasing. 

It  is  fair  to  conclude,  from  all  the  foregoing,  that  with 
the  smaller  species  the  natural  balance  of  bird-life  is  now 
fairly  constant  in  Massachusetts  and  the  neighboring  States, 
and  that  the  decrease  will  be  found  mainly  among  those 
species  that  are  most  hunted. 

It  now  remains  to   take  up  separately  those  families  of 


452  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

birds  which  are  reported  as  diminishing  in  Massachusetts, 
that  we  may  see  what  species  most  need  protection.  While 
it  is  difficult  to  get  accurate  reports  regarding  birds  as  a 
whole,  those  regarding  particular  species  are  more  readily 
obtained.  Such  reports  are  the  more  valuable,  as  they  indi- 
cate just  where  protection  is  needed. 

BIRDS    REPORTED  AS    DIMINISHING   IN   NUMBERS. 

Family  Podicipidce.  —  Grebes. 

This  includes  the  birds  commonly  known  as  dippers,  water 
witches,  etc.  This  family  and  the  one  following  seem  to  be 
of  comparatively  little  economic  importance  so  far  as  the 
farmer  is  concerned,  as  the  birds  composing  them  get  their 
food  almost  entirely  from  the  water.  The  pied-billed  grebe 
undoubtedly  once  bred  in  suitable  places  about  the  inland 
bodies  of  water  in  this  State ;  it  is  now  known  to  breed  in 
very  few  localities  east  of  the  Connecticut  River.  It  has 
been  driven  away  from  at  least  three  localities  in  Massachu- 
setts in  the  last  few  years.  It  is  still  fairly  common  in  the 
migrations  on  many  of  the  ponds  and  rivers  in  the  interior 
of  the  State,  but  seems  to  have  decreased  greatly  on  the 
rivers  of  eastern  Massachusetts,  where,  although  its  flesh  is 
of  little  value,  it  is  pursued  and  shot  whenever  it  appears. 
This  grebe  might  have  been  able  to  dive  quickly  enough  (at 
the  flash)  to  escape  the  charge  of  the  flint-lock  gun,  but 
with  the  modern  breech  loader  at  close  range  it  has  no 
chance.  The  horned  grebe  also  probably  once  bred  here, 
but  is  now  seldom  seen  except  in  migrations  or  in  the  win- 
ter. Along  the  coasts  the  grebes  are  quite  well  able  to  take 
care  of  themselves,  and,  as  they  now  breed  mainly  far  to 
the  north,  where  they  are  little  disturbed  by  man,  our  three 
.  species  seem  about  as  common  as  ever  on  the  coast  in  their 
migrations. 

Family  Gavidce.  —  Loons. 

Loons,  no  doubt,  once  bred  commonly  in  the  more  retired 
ponds  over  a  great  part  of  the  State.  Thirty  years  ago  they 
were  not  rare  in  the  breeding  season  in  the  northern  part 
of  Worcester  County,  where  they  were  observed  to  nest  at 
different  localities  by  Messrs.  C.  E.  Ingalls  and  C.  E.  Bai- 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIKDS.  453 

ley.  I  am  not  aware  that  they  now  nest  anywhere  in  the 
State.  No  doubt  they  would  have  been  driven  from  the 
interior  of  the  State  long  ago,  had  they  not  been  well  able 
to  take  care  of  themselves  by  diving.  They  are  still  to  be 
seen  in  the  migrations  in  most  of  the  larger  and  more  re- 
mote bodies  of  water,  and  seem  to  maintain  their  numbers 
along  the  coast,  as  does  also  the  red-throated  loon. 

Family  Laridce.  —  Gulls  and  Terns. 
Certain  of  these  birds  were  once  very  abundant  in  the 
breeding  season  on  Long  Island  Sound,  and  bred  also  in 
suitable  islands  all  along  the  Massachusetts  coast.  Miss 
Katharine  P.  Loring  of  Prides  Crossing,  Beverly,  writes 
that  about  forty  years  ago  there  were  large  numbers  of 
"gulls"  in  spring  at  Gooseberry  Island  and  Eagle  Island 
off  the  Beverly  shore,  and  that  these  islands  were  * '  covered 
with  their  eggs."  The  birds  referred  to  were  probably 
terns,  or  "  mackerel  gulls,"  as  they  are  called  locally.  The 
Arctic  and  roseate  terns  are  both  recorded  as  breeding  at 
Beverly  and  Ipswich  as  late  as  1846  and  1869  respectively.* 
These  terns,  together  with  the  common  and  least  terns  and 
the  laughing  gull,  bred  abundantly  along  our  coast  as  late  as 
the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  century.  They  were  grad- 
ually driven  off  the  breeding  grounds  by  eggers.  In  the 
decade  before  1890  the  demand  for  the  plumage  of  gulls  and 
terns  for  millinery  purposes  became  so  great  that  they  were 
menaced  with  extermination.  Mr.  Geo.  H.  Mackay  says 
that  he  has  been  informed  that  one  party  of  gunners  killed 
no  less  than  ten  thousand  of  these  birds  on  Muskeeget 
Island  in  one  year.  Since  then  Mr.  Mackay,  who  was  for 
years  a  member  of  the  committee  on  bird  protection  of  the 
American  Ornithologists'  Union,  has  succeeded  in  securing 
protection  for  the  birds  breeding  on  this  and  other  islands, 
as  a  result  of  which  they  have  increased  enormously.  He 
says  that  they  are  now  more  abundant  than  at  any  time  for 
many  years.  The  least  tern,  or  sea  swallow,  however, 
which  was  formerly  abundant,  but  was  one  of  the  chief 
victims  of  the  milliners,  has  not,  he  says,  shared  in  this  in- 

*  "  Bkds  of  Massachusetts,"  Howe  and  Allen,  p.  27. 


454  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

crease,  and  is  now  comparatively  rare.  The  herring  gull 
probably  once  bred  here,  and  still  breeds  on  the  Maine 
coast.  This  bird  is  as  wary  as  a  crow  while  here,  and,  if 
protected  on  its  breeding  grounds,  it  is  likely  to  maintain 
its  full  numbers.  It  is  seen  here  now  mainly  in  fall,  winter 
and  spring.  Probably  no  sea  birds  other  than  the  laughing 
<mll  and  the  terns  above  mentioned  now  breed  in  Massachu- 

o 

setts,  although  gannets,  cormorants  and  other  species  are 
seen  along  the  coasts  in  migration. 

Family  Anatidce. —  Ducks,  Geese  and  /Swans. 

This  family  contains  a  large  number  of  beautiful  and 
graceful  birds,  known  generally  as  wild-fowl  or  water-fowl. 
They  form  collectively  one  of  the  most  valuable  natural 
assets  of  any  country.  Many  species  are  unexcelled  as 
food,  and,  if  properly  protected,  they  will  continue  an  an- 
nual source  of  food  or  income  to  a  considerable  proportion 
of  the  rural  population.  Their  presence  on  the  waters  or  in 
their  peculiar  flight-formations  adds  a  certain  charm  to  any 
landscape.  Their  sonorous  cries  and  calls  speak  of  the 
freedom  of  the  wilderness.  Were  they  extinct,  how  we 
should  miss  the  call  of  the  wild  geese  in  the  spring,  and  the 
sight  of  their  wedge-shaped  flocks  sweeping  across  the  sky  ! 
Yet  we  are  strenuously  endeavoring  to  extirpate  them. 
The  wild  swans  are  gone ;  only  a  few  wanderers  have  been 
recorded  as  shot  in  the  State  during  the  last  quarter  of  the 
past  century ;  their  occurrence  here  now  may  be  regarded 
as  merely  accidental. 

TJie  Geese  (Subfamily  Anserince). — The  lesser  snow 
goose  is  probably  the  white  goose  that  was  once  so  abun- 
dant in  Massachusetts  Bay  and  on  Cape  Cod,  according  to 
the  tales  of  the  early  settlers.  It  is  now  so  rare  as  to  be 
regarded  as  merely  an  accidental  visitor,  and  I  am  not  aware 
of  any  very  recent  capture  of  this  bird  in  Massachusetts. 

The  Canada  goose,  although  still  a  common  migrant,  has 
decreased  in  numbers  within  my  recollection.  Mr.  Elbridge 
Gerry  of  Stoneham,  who  has  been  a  market-hunter  for 
nearly  seventy  years,  says  there  were  a  hundred  geese  in 
his  boyhood  days  to  one  now ;  and  yet  he  believes  that 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  455 

more  are  being  killed  now  than  ever  before,  on  account  of  the 
use  of  trained  live  decoys.  This  bird,  though  once  breed- 
ing here,  now  breeds  mainly  north  of  the  United  States. 
According  to  Mr.  William  Brewster,  it  is  now  protected  on 
its  breeding  grounds  on  the  island  of  Anticosti.  This 
island,  some  forty  miles  in  length,  is  studded  with  numer- 
ous ponds,  where  the  geese  can  now  breed  unmolested. 
This  protection,  together  with  the  extreme  wariness  the  birds 
have  acquired,  may  account  in  part  for  their  having  held 
their  numbers  so  well  in  their  flights  along  our  coast  for  the 
last  twenty  years.  Fifty  to  seventy  years  ago  the  geese 
often  flew  very  low  over  the  country,  and  sometimes  they 
alighted  in  pastures  and  corn  fields ;  now  they  usually  fly 
high,  and  seldom  alight  except  on  some  sheet  of  water. 
Mr.  Mackay  believes  that  the  Canada  geese  are  not  now 
decreasing  at  Nantucket. 

The  Brant  goose,  which  was  once  remarkably  abundant  all 
along  our  shores,  was  very  common  some  seasons  in  migra- 
tion at  Chatham  and  some  other  points  on  Cape  Cod  up  to 
the  latter  part  of  the  last  century,  but  rare  elsewhere.  I 
am  informed  by  Mr.  Elbridge  Gerry  that  Brant  are  now 
rare  even  there,  in  comparison  with  their  former  numbers. 

These  are  probably  the  only  three  species  of  geese  that 
were  ever  abundant  in  Massachusetts. 

The  Bay  and  Sea  Ducks  ( Subfamily  FuligulincB) .  — 
Ducks  are  divided  into  three  subfamilies,  bay  and  sea  ducks, 
river  and  pond  ducks,  and  mergansers  or  sheldrakes. 

The  first  subfamily,  the  bay  and  sea  ducks,  is  composed 
of  birds  that  find  their  food  by  diving.  These  birds  breed 
mainly  in  the  far  north,  where,  excepting  the  eiders,  they 
are  not  much  molested.  They  can  usually  keep  well  away 
from  the  shore,  and  can  escape  the  gunner  by  diving  and 
swimming  under  water,  as  well  as  by  flight.  Most  of  them 
are  not  highly  esteemed  as  food,  on  account  of  their  fishy 
flavor,  and  for  these  reasons  they  have  on  the  whole  main- 
tained their  numbers  better  than  any  other  ducks.  One 
species,  however,  the  ruddy  duck,  which  habitually  feeds  in 
small  ponds  near  the  sea,  has  decreased  very  rapidly  of  late. 
They  once  bred  in  Massachusetts.  Thirty  years  ago  they 


450  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

were  very  common  migrants  ;  now  they  are  seldom  seen. 
In  1878  I  found  them  abundant  in  Florida ;  in  1899  I  did 
not  see  a  single  bird  there,  though  it  was  a  good  season  for 
ducks  of  all  kinds.  They  are  now  the  object  of  special  per- 
secution, and  have  been  for  twenty  years  or  more.  Their 
price  in  the  market  has  quadrupled.  Unless  something  effec- 
tive is  done  for  their  protection,  they  are  likely  to  follow  the 
species  already  extirpated.  The  scoters  or  surf  ducks,  called 
coots  by  the  gunners,  although  perhaps  decreasing  slightly, 
appear  to  be  nearly  as  abundant  as  they  have  been  within 
the  memory  of  people  now  living.  Mr.  Gerry  says  they 
are  nearly  as  plentiful  as  ever  along  the  coast ;  Mr.  Mackay 
has  studied  the  sea  birds,  wild-fowl  and  shore  birds  for 
many  years.  He  has  visited  the  Boston  markets  at  least 
twice  each  week  during  the  season,  and  carefully  noted  what 
birds  were  on  sale  there.  He  has  spent  much  time  on  Nan- 
tucket  and  the  adjacent  islands,  both  in  the  shooting  and 
breeding  seasons.  His  opinion  on  this  subject  is  therefore 
of  the  greatest  value.  He  says  that  surf  ducks  and  eider 
ducks  seem  to  hold  their  own  generally,  especially  about 
Nantucket.  He  believes  the  white-winged  scoter  has  dimin- 
ished very  little.  The  American  scoter  he  has  never  known 
to  be  plentiful,  but  apparently  it  has  decreased  to  some  extent. 

The  old  squaw  is  still  very  common,  and  no  decrease  is 
noted  by  any  one.  Mr.  Mackay  regards  it  as  very  abun- 
dant. The  bufflehead  is  still  common  along  the  coast,  but 
has  been  driven  out  to  some  extent  from  many  ponds  and 
rivers  in  the  interior,  where  it  is  not  so  common  as  formerly 
in  the  migrations.  The  golden-eye  or  whistler  is  also  still 
common  on  the  coast. 

The  greater  scaup  duck,  blackhead  or  bluebill  was  once  very 
abundant  in  Massachusetts  waters.  The  scaup  decreased 
rapidly  off  the  Massachusetts  coast,  until  they  became  rather 
rare  a  few  years  ago.  Mr.  Mackay,  however,  says  they  are 
now  becoming  common  at  Nantucket,  and  Mr.  Hoffman  rates 
them  as  common  migrants.* 

The  lesser  scaup,  raft  duck,  little  blackhead,  or  bluebill, 

*  "A  guide  to  the  birds  of  New  England  and  New  York,"  Ralph  Hoffman, 
p.  299. 


No.  4.]  DECEEASE   OF   BIRDS.  457 

as  it  is  known  among  the  gunners,  was  once  one  of  the 
most  abundant  of  all  ducks  along  the  Atlantic  seaboard. 
Ranging  to  middle  or  southern  Florida  in  winter,  it  is  ex- 
posed to  the  gunners  all  along  the  coast.  It  has  decreased 
more  than  some  other  bay  ducks,  —  perhaps  for  this  reason. 
I  found  it  in  northern  Florida  in  1878,  the  most  abun- 
dant water-fowl  I  have  ever  seen.  At  that  time  great 
' '  rafts  "  of  these  ducks,  at  least  a  mile  in  length,  were  seen 
on  Indian  River.  When  a  boat  approached  one  of  these 
great  masses  of  birds,  those  nearest  the  boat  would  rise  and 
fly  over  the  flock,  making  one  continuous  roar  of  wings  as 
the  boat  approached.  While  crossing  Lake  George  on  a 
steamer,  the  remarkable  spectacle  was  witnessed  of  a  sheet 
of  water  dotted  all  over  with  these  ducks  as  far  as  the  eye 
could  see.  In  1899  in  the  same  region  there  were  still 
some  large  flocks,  but  I  estimated  that  the  birds  had  dimin- 
ished fully  75  per  cent.  The  lesser  scaup  is  now  growing 
rare  in  this  State.  Redheads  and  canvasbacks  have  never 
been  recorded  as  generally  common  in  Massachusetts.  Mr. 
Mackay  says  that  more  redheads  were  seen  at  Nantucket  in 
the  winter  of  1903-04  than  for  many  years. 

The  Pond  and  River  Ducks  (/Subfamily  Anatince'). — 
Mr.  Hoffman  says  :  "  Seven  species  belonging  to  this  divi- 
sion occur  regularly  in  eastern  New  York  and  New  England. 
All  but  one,  however,  are  now  so  rare  that  the  ordinary  ob- 
server will  hardly  come  across  them."  *  This  is  indeed  true 
in  regard  to  Massachusetts.  In  the  course  of  this  inquiry 
only  one  observer  reported  these  ducks  as  holding  their 
own  ;  all  others  reported  them  as  decreasing.  These  birds 
may  be  distinguished  from  the  bay  and  sea  ducks  by  the  fact 
that  they  do  not  dive  for  their  food,  but  take  their  food  from 
the  bottom  in  shallow  water  by  putting  their  heads  under. 
They  are  more  distinctly  fresh-water  ducks  than  the  bay 
and  sea  ducks,  and  are  more  exposed  to  the  gunners  by 
reason  of  their  feeding  in  shallow  water  and  usually  near 
shore.  No  doubt  our  ponds,  marshes  and  streams  once 
swarmed  with  these  ducks  during  the  migrations,  and  it  is 

*  "  A  guide  to  the  birds  of  New  England  and  New  York,"  Ralph  Hoffman, 
p.  301. 


458  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

not  improbable  that  some  of  them  bred  here,  as  the  wood 
duck  and  black  duck  still  do  to  some  extent. 

The  wood  duck,  the  most  beautiful  of  all  ducks,  once  bred 
abundantly  throughout  New  England.  In  Massachusetts  it 
has  been  growing  rarer  near  the  coast  for  years,  but  has 
been  fairly  common  in  parts  of  most  of  the  inland  counties 
until  the  latter  part  of  the  last  century.  In  this  inquiry  no 
questions  were  asked  regarding  the  wood  duck,  but  informa- 
tion comes  from  Berkshire,  Worcester,  Essex,  Middlesex, 
Norfolk,  Plymouth  and  Bristol  counties  that  this  bird  is  rap- 
idly decreasing,  or  gone.  Fourteen  observers  speak  of  the 
bird  as  follows  :  extinct,  three ;  nearing  extinction,  five ; 
decreasing,  three  ;  decreasing  until  the  last  two  years,  one ; 
holding  their  own,  two.  Some  of  these  reports  come  from 
regions  where  the  wood  duck  has  always  been  a  common 
bird.  In  other  sections  its  absence  has  now  ceased  to  at- 
tract notice.  My  own  experience  with  the  wood  ducks 
seems  to  indicate  that  they  are  decreasing  rapidly.  A  few 
years  ago  they  were  occasionally  seen  in  small  flocks  during 
the  breeding  season  ;  this  year  I  saw  but  one  in  the  migra- 
tions at  Concord.  This  bird,  a  fine  male,  was  comparatively 
tame,  and  I  might  have  shot  him  on  three  different  occa- 
sions. He  was  finally  killed  by  a  gunner.  This  species  is 
not  so  wary  as  many  other  ducks.  It  often  haunts  small 
streams  and  ponds  which  can  be  shot  across.  Where  gun- 
ners find  a  family  of  these  birds,  it  is  not  very  difficult  for 
them  to  get  every  one.  Mr.  Edwin  R.  Lewis,  one  of  the 
bird  commissioners  of  Rhode  Island,  wrote  me  from  West- 
erly, on  Dec.  19,  1904,  that  wood  ducks  had  been  only  oc- 
casionally seen  that  year,  and  that  he  knew  of  only  ten  of 
these  birds  having  been  killed  during  the  season.  In  1901 
Dr.  A.  K.  Fisher  of  the  United  States  Biological  Survey 
predicted  that  the  wood  duck  and  the  woodcock  would 
become  extinct,  unless  better  protected.*  This  prediction 
now  seems  in  a  fair  way  to  be  realized,  so  far  as  wood  ducks 
breeding  in  Massachusetts  are  concerned. 

The  American  widgeon   or  baldpate  was  formerly  seen 

*  "Two  vanishing  game  birds,"  A.  K.  Fisher,  Year  Book  of  the  Department 
of  Agriculture  for  1901,  published  in  1902. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  459 

quite  generally  in  small  flocks  on  the  interior  waters  of  New 
England.  It  is  now  believed  to  be  either  uncommon,  rare, 
or  wanting  everywhere  in  Massachusetts  except  possibly  in 
the  Connecticut  valley  and  along  the  coast  in  some  seasons  ; 
but  Mr.  Mackay  regards  it  as  not  uncommon  on  Nantucket. 

The  black  duck  has  fallen  off  very  much  in  numbers,  but 
it  is  the  only  river  duck  that  still  may  be  regarded  as  gen- 
erally common  in  the  State.  Mr.  Gerry  says  that  the  number 
of  black  ducks  seen  now  is  about  one-tenth  of  one  per  cent 
of  the  number  that  were  here  seventy  years  ago,  and  that 
they  have  been  decreasing  ever  since  that  time.  He  says 
he  killed  sixty-six  black  ducks  in  two  mornings  in  Spot 
Pond,  Stoneham,  about  fifteen  years  ago,  and  that  the  ducks 
there  are  increasing  now  under  the  protection  of  the  Met- 
ropolitan Park  Commission,  but  that  in  the  ponds  outside 
of  the  park  there  are  practically  no  ducks  now.  Black 
ducks  leave  the  salt  water  at  night,  going  to  the  springs  for 
fresh  water  when  the  ground  is  frozen.  They  have  been 
greatly  decreased  by  night-shooting,  but  they  have  now  be- 
come very  shy,  and  usually  hide  in  the  reedy  sloughs,  or, 
when  in  ponds  or  on  salt  water,  keep  well  away  from  the 
shore  during  the  day.  There  seems  to  have  been  a  slight 
increase  of  these  birds  within  a  year,  and  a  good  flight  in 
some  sections  in  the  fall  of  1904. 

The  mallard  has  been  generally  rare  in  the  State  for  many 
years.  Mr.  Arthur  Curtis  Dyke  of  Bridge  water  regards  it 
now  as  being,  next  to  the  black  duck,  the  most  common 
there.  Mr.  Lewis  reports  an  increase  of  mallards  in  1904 
in  Rhode  Island.  The  shoveler  is  very  rare,  and  the  gad  wall 
also  rare,  although  said  to  have  been  once  not  uncommon. 
The  pintail  may  now  be  considered  a  rare  bird  in  most  of 
Massachusetts,  where  within  thirty-five  years  it  was  com- 
monly seen  in  small  flocks.  The  blue-winged  teal  was  a  com- 
mon migrant  in  the  State  up  to  within  thirty  years,  being 
found  in  large  flocks  in  the  small  ponds  and  streams.  Mr. 
Gerry  says  that  fifteen  to  forty  years  ago  he  killed  blue- 
winged  teal  nearly  every  morning,  in  the  season,  at  Spot 
Pond,  which  is  only  about  seven  or  eight  miles  from  Boston. 
He  has  seen  about  two  hundred  birds  in  a  flock  at  Plymouth, 


460  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

and  has  been  informed  that  a  boy  killed  eighty-four  in  one 
day  within  twenty  years  at  Sandwich.  Now  the  teal  are 
nearly  all  gone,  although  there  was  a  small  flight  in  the  fall 
of  1904.  In  September  a  flock  of  fourteen  birds  passed 
me  three  times  on  the  Concord  River.  They  were  fired  at 
several  tunes,  and  that  was  the  last  I  saw  of  them.  I  have 
not  seen  so  many  in  a  flock  for  years.  Occasionally  a  small 
flight  like  this  is  seen  in  the  fall,  but  very  few  ever  come 
back  in  the  spring.  Mr.  Mackay  says  that  until  1904  prob- 
ably not  forty  blue-winged  teal  have  been  seen  on  Nantucket 
in  fifteen  years. 

Green- winged  teal,  Mr.  Gerry  says,  were  formerly  very 
plentiful,  but  he  has  not  seen  one  now  for  five  years.  In 
1870  my  predecessor,  Mr.  E.  A.  Samuels,  regarded  this  bird 
as  "  quite  abundant"  *  in  the  spring  and  autumn  migrations 
in  New  England.  Now  it  is  rare,  and  seems  to  be  going  out. 
I  have  not  seen  one  in  Massachusetts  for  years.  Mr.  Mac- 
kay says  it  was  formerly  common  but  is  now  very  rare. 

The  Mergansers  (Subfamily  Mergince} . — The  mergansers, 
sheldrakes  or  fish  ducks  are  still  not  uncommon,  the  red- 
breasted  merganser  being  abundant  off  the  coast  in  the  migra- 
tions. These  birds  are  expert  divers,  breed  far  north,  and 
most  of  them  do  not  go  far  south.  They  are  well  able  to  take 
care  of  themselves.  The  American  merganser,  goosander 
or  pond  sheldrake  was  formerly  very  common  on  ponds  and 
rivers,  and  once  bred  in  the  State.  It  is  still  common  in 
winter  along  the  Connecticut.  The  hooded  merganser,  once, 
like  the  wood  duck,  very  common,  is  growing  rare,  and  is 
now  the  rarest  of  the  mergansers. 

Family  Ardeidce.  —  Herons. 

It  seems  probable  that  herons  are  decreasing  in  many 
localities.  Thirty-five  persons  report  them  as  decreasing, 
twelve  report  them  as  unchanged  in  numbers,  and  five  state 
that  night  herons  are  increasing.  My  own  experience, 
together  with  that  of  others  in  whose  judgment  I  have  great 
confidence,  seems  to  indicate  that,  in  general,  these  birds  are 
not  now  decreasing  rapidly.  The  law  passed  in  1904  giving 

»  "  Birds  of  New  England,"  E.  A.  Samuels,  p.  493. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIEDS.  461 

them  protection  was  no  doubt  necessary  to  their  preserva- 
tion, as  their  size  alone  dooms  them  to  constant  persecution. 

The  least  bittern  keeps  very  closely  hidden  in  the  mead- 
ows or  swamps  and  is  seldom  seen  by  the  ordinary  observer. 
While  it  probably  has  been  driven  out  of  many  localities  by 
the  draining  of  meadows,  I  hear  its  note  in  suitable  places 
quite  as  often  as  I  did  when  a  boy. 

The  green  heron  has  grown  less  common  where  boys  or 
foreigners  do  much  shooting ;  elsewhere  it  probably  does  not 
vary  much  in  numbers,  except  where  the  trees  or  shrubs  in 
which  it  breeds  are  cut  away.  In  the  localities  which  I 
have  frequented  this  year,  however,  it  has  been  less  com- 
mon than  usual. 

The  American  bittern  was  driven  out  of  many  of  its 
breeding  places  last  year.  Breeding  birds  have  disappeared 
from  a  certain  locality  in  "Wareham  where  they  were  for- 
merly seen.  This  was  probably  due  to  shooting.  On  the 
other  hand,  they  were  more  common  along  the  river  in 
Concord  this  year  than  last.  On  the  whole,  the  bittern 
seems  to  be  holding  its  own  fairly  well,  excepting  near  the 
cities. 

The  great  blue  heron  no  doubt  formerly  bred  abundantly 
in  some  localities  in  Massachusetts.  In  September,  1874, 
I  saw  what  seemed  to  be  a  nest  of  this  species  in  North 
Brookfield ;  but  I  know  of  no  recent  record  of  its  breeding 
in  the  State,  and  it  was  probably  driven  out  long  ago.*  It 
visits  us  regularly  in  the  migrations,  and  takes  care  of  itself 
so  well  that  few  except  immature  birds  are  shot.  In  my 
own  experience  this  species  has  not  diminished  greatly  of 
late,  but  I  saw  fewer  birds  this  year  than  last.  Many  other 
observers,  however,  are  very  positive  that  the  great  blue 
heron  is  steadily  diminishing  in  numbers,  despite  the  law 
recently  enacted  protecting  all  herons  at  all  times  in  Massa- 
chusetts. Mr.  Gerry  says  they  are  few  along  the  coast,  in 
comparison  with  the  numbers  formerly  seen.  About  thirty 
years  ago  he  saw  between  thirty  and  forty  at  once  feeding 
at  Wellfleet. 

*  Since  the  above  was  written  I  have  heen  told  by  Mr.  J.  A.  Farley  that  a 
single  nest  of  this  species  has  been  found  recently  in  the  State  by  Mr.  C.  E.  Bailey. 


462  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

The  black-crowned  night  heron  has  certainly  been  driven 
out  from  three  inland  localities  where  I  formerly  knew  it  to 
breed.  The  birds  were  persecuted  by  egg-hunters  and  gun- 
ners, so  that  they  were  forced  to  change  their  breeding  grounds 
nearly  every  year ;  and  finally  they  were  killed  or  scattered, 
so  that  these  heronries  exist  only  as  memories  of  the  past. 
The  birds  have  persisted,  however,  along  the  coast,  and 
some  of  their  heronries  are  now  protected.  All  other  herons 
besides  those  mentioned  above  are  regarded  as  accidental  in 
Massachusetts. 

Family  Rdllidm. — Rails,  Gallinules  and  Coots. 
These  birds,  particularly  the  rails,  are  rather  secretive, 
and  ordinarily  are  seldom  seen  in  this  region.  Their  habits 
protect  them.  The  gallinules  are  not  known  ever  to  have 
been  common.  The  coots,  the  least  secretive  of  the  family, 
probably  have  decreased,  while  the  rails  seem  to  hold  their 
own  except  where  driven  out  by  floods  or  the  draining  of 
meadows.  They  are  probably  overlooked  by  most  gunners. 
Only  a  few  observers  report  on  them  at  all ;  these  find  them 
about  the  same  as  ever,  except  Mr.  Edward  A.  Bangs,  who 
says :  * '  On  occasional  trips  to  the  Sudbury  marshes  at 
Wayland  it  seems  to  me  that  the  ducks,  rails,  herons, 
etc.,  have  almost  disappeared." 

Order  Limicolce. 

Shore  Birds.  —  Only  twelve  of  the  forty-two  species  of 
shore  birds  known  to  inhabit  the  State  or  migrate  through 
it  can  now  be  regarded  as  at  all  common.  Three  species 
are  uncommon  ;  fourteen,  rare  ;  and  the  rest  merely  acci- 
dental or  casual.  Most  of  those  now  considered  common 
were  formerly  very  abundant,  as  were  also  some  which  are 
now  rare.  Nearly  all  the  larger  species  are  now  either  un- 
common, rare  or  casual.  Some  of  them  are  nearly  extir- 
pated or  driven  off  our  coasts.  A  few  of  the  accidental 
species  never  were  common  here,  but  the  others  probably 
were.  The  common  smaller  species  have  been  saved  from 
total  destruction,  some  by  their  small  size,  which  makes 
shooting  them  of  little  profit,  and  some  by  not  consort- 
ing together  in  large  flocks.  For  these  reasons  mainly, 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  463 

perhaps,  the  ' '  peeps "  or  smaller  sandpipers,  the  smaller 
plovers  and  the  spotted  and  solitary  sandpipers  now  seem 
to  hold  their  own  very  well,  although  the  "peeps"  and 
sanderlings  were  once  very  much  more  abundant  than  now. 
Turnstones  are  still  not  uncommon,  both  in  spring  and  fall. 
The  black-bellied  plover,  or  beetlehead,  a  bird  formerly  mi- 
grating along  our  coast  in  enormous  numbers,  has  decreased 
rapidly  since  the  middle  of  the  last  century.  In  1842  three 
men  shot  one  hundred  and  twenty-one  birds  May  24,  and 
one  hundred  and  fifty  May  25,  on  Tuckernuck  Island.  In 
1870  a  law  was  passed  prohibiting  the  shooting  of  these 
birds  in  the  spring  migrations.  The  law  was  repealed  in 
1871,  but  afterward  re-enacted,  and  since  then  the  species 
has  increased  somewhat.'  Mr.  Mackay  says  that  never  for 
the  last  fifteen  years  have  there  been  so  many  of  these  birds 
as  during  the  past  two  seasons,  —  1903  and  1904 ;  and  that 
there  is  now  a  notable  increase  of  young  birds  each  fall. 
The  golden  plover  has  not  benefited  much  by  this  law.  The 
abundance  of  the  Eskimo  curlew  and  the  golden  plover  is 
largely  governed  by  the  amount  of  spring  shooting  done  in 
the  Mississippi  valley,  as  most  of  these  birds  come  north 
by  that  route.  "The  golden  plover  is  now  practically 
eliminated  from  the  east,"  says  Mr.  Mackay.  This  was 
once  one  of  the  most  abundant  of  our  migrating  birds, 
coming  at  times  in  enormous  flights,  and  fairly  glutting  the 
markets.  Mr.  Henry  Shaw  tells  me  that  at  one  time,  prob- 
ably soon  after  1860,  a  great  flight  of  these  birds  swarmed 
over  the  fields  south  of  Worcester,  and  that  practically  every 
man  and  boy  in  the  place  who  could  get  a  gun  was  out 
shooting  them.  There  is  no  record  of  a  single  bird  having 
been  killed  there  since.  Mr.  Mackay  says  that  only  about 
a  dozen  golden  plover  were  seen  in  the  Boston  market  in 
1904,  up  to  September  16. 

The  killdeer  plover  is  said  by  old  gunners  to  have  been 
common  once  on  the  coast,  and  occasionally  plentiful  in  the 
interior  and  along  the  Connecticut  River.  Several  observers 
confirm  this.  It  was  once  not  rare  in  some  portions  of 
Worcester  County,  and  common  in  Berkshire  County ;  it  is 
now  rare  everywhere,  so  far  as  I  can  learn. 

The  long-billed  curlew,  or  sicklebill,  the  largest  of  the 


BOARD  OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

curlews,  has  not  been  common  in  migrations  on  the  Massa- 
chusetts coast  within  the  memory  of  old  gunners.  It  is 
now  merely  casual.  Mr.  Mackay  refers  to  it  as  follows : 
"  Only  rare  stragglers  left,  less  than  half  a  dozen  having 
been  taken  in  Massachusetts  in  twenty  years.  Very  few 
left  in  South  Carolina,  where  they  were  formerly  very 
abundant." 

The  Hudsonian  or  jack  curlew  was  a  very  abundant  spe- 
cies sixty-five  or  seventy  years  ago.  "  On  Nantucket  and 
Tuckernuck  they  were  then  shy,  as  now.  They  gradually 
decreased  until  about  fifteen  years  ago.  After  that  about 
one  hundred  and  fifty  birds  appeared  annually  in  July  and 
remained  through  the  summer.  A  few  are  killed  each  year, 
but  the  numbers  remain  about  the  same.  They  are  the 
most  common  curlew  now  on  Nantucket.  They  are  much 
fewer  now  in  the  Boston  market  than  in  former  years." 
(Mackay.) 

The  Eskimo  curlew,  or  doughbird,  was  once  an  abundant 
migrant.  This  curlew  is  the  most  highly  esteemed  by  epi- 
cures of  all  shore  birds  ;  for  this  reason  it  has  been  hunted 
incessantly  whenever  it  appears.  "About  1872  there  was 
a  great  flight  of  these  birds  on  Cape  Cod  and  Nantucket ; 
they  were  everywhere.  Enormous  numbers  were  killed. 
They  could  be  bought  of  boys  at  six  cents  apiece.  Two 
men  killed  three  hundred  dollars'  worth  of  these  birds  at 
that  time."  (Gerry.)  "Eskimo  curlew,  once  common, 
have  not  been  seen  on  Nantucket  or  brought  into  the  Bos- 
ton market  as  taken  in  Massachusetts  (except  an  occasional 
bird)  for  a  number  of  years."  (Mackay.)  "Almost  ex- 
tinct." (C.  L.  Perkins,  Newburyport.)  These  birds  are 
either  nearly  extinct  in  the  east,  or  are  avoiding  our  coasts 
in  the  migrations.  Mr.  Mackay  says  that  the  Eskimo  cur- 
lew and  the  golden  plover  have  dropped  off  90  per  cent  in 
fifty  years,  and  that  in  the  last  ten  years  90  per  cent  of 
the  remaining  birds  have  disappeared.  These  two  species 
almost  invariably  migrate  together,  and  so  are  subject  to 
equal  decimation  from  gunners. 

The  Hudsonian  godwit,  or  "  goose  bird,"  as  it  was  called 
by  the  Massachusetts  gunners,  was  once  perhaps  as  abundant 


No.  4.]  DECKEASE   OF   BIRDS.  465 

as  any  of  the  larger  shore  birds  on  the  coast.  "  This  bird 
was  as  plentiful  as  any  bird  I  ever  saw  at  Ipswich  sixty  years 
ago.  I  have  not  seen  one  now  for  about  thirty  years." 
(Gerry.)  It  is  now  growing  very  rare,  and,  together  with 
the  marbled  godwit,  a  famous  bird  of  the  olden  time,  is 
seldom  seen  now  on  our  coast.  "  Practically  none  left  of 
either  species."  (Mackay.) 

Vast  flights  of  the  knot,  or  red-breasted  sandpiper,  used 
to  roam  this  coast.  Fifty  years  ago  this  bird  was  very  abun- 
dant. '  *  Now  fallen  off  9,8  per  cent,  and  the  red-breasted 
snipe  or  dowitcher  is  nearly  in  the  same  category."  (Mac- 
kay.)  "I  have  seen  the  redbreast  at  Orleans  flying  in 
clouds.  My  father  killed  two  hundred  in  one  day  in  1848 
at  Nauset  Harbor.  I  have  not  seen  a  bird  now  in  fifteen 
years  in  the  same  places.  The  marsh  snipe  (dowitcher)  used 
to  be  very  plentiful  at  Ipswich  and  Wellfleet.  I  have  not 
seen  one  for  ten  years."  (Gerry.) 

Previous  to  1850,  when  the  Cape  Cod  railroad  was  com- 
pleted only  to  Sandwich,  the  knot  was  still  a  very  abundant 
bird  at  Chatham,  Nauset,  Wellfleet  and  Billingsgate,  Cape 
Cod.  At  the  flats  around  Tuckernuck  and  Muskeeget 
islands  they  were  remarkably  numerous.  At  this  time  the 
vicious  practice  of  u  fire  lighting"  prevailed.  Two  men 
together,  one  with  a  lantern  and  the  other  with  a  bag,  would 
creep  on  the  flocks  at  night.  While  one  man  dazzled  the 
bird's  eyes  with  the  lantern,  the  other  caught  them,  and, 
biting  their  necks  to  kill  them,  put  them  into  the  bag.  Six 
barrels  of  these  little  birds  taken  in  this  manner  were  seen 
at  one  time  on  the  deck  of  the  Cape  Cod  packet  for  Boston. 
Barrels  of  birds  which  were  spoiled  during  the  voyage  were 
sometimes  thrown  overboard  in  Boston  harbor.  The  price 
of  the  birds  at  that  time  was  but  ten  cents  per  dozen.* 

The  willet,  or  humility,  as  it  is  called  along  shore,  one  of 
the  great  tattlers,  was  probably  one  of  the  birds  referred  to 
by  the  early  settlers,  under  the  same  name,  as  flocking  on  our 
coasts  in  vast  numbers.  "These  birds  were  very  plentiful  at 
Wellfleet,  and  there  were  a  good  many  at  Ipswich,  but  lately 

*  "  Observations  on  the  knot,"  Geo.  H.  Mackay,  Auk,  Vol.  X,  January,  1893, 
p.  29. 

L95892 


466  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

they  have  been  growing  rare.  I  have  seen  several  within 
five  or  six  years."  (Gerry.)  "  Sixty  years  ago  the  willet 
was  abundant,  and  bred  here.  Fifteen  to  eighteen  years 
ago  a  few  were  seen  each  season.  Now  they  are  gone  ;  only 
an  occasional  straggler  now  seen."  (Mackay.)  "Nearly 
exterminated."  (Perkins.) 

The  greater  and  the  lesser  yellowlegs  are  still  fairly  com- 
mon in  some  seasons  and  localities,  but  they  were  once  very 
abundant,  and  they  are  probably  still  decreasing  in  spite 
of  the  protection  afforded  them  pn  some  of  their  northern 
breeding  grounds.  "  The  lesser  yellowlegs  have  fallen  off  on 
Nantucket  60  per  cent  in  fifteen  years,  and  the  winter  yellow- 
legs  about  the  same.  There  also  has  been  a  considerable 
falling  off  in  the  number  of  these  birds  from  Massachusetts 
sources  in  the  Boston  market."  (Mackay.)  The  yellow- 
legs  were  the  only  shore  birds  reported  as  common  in  the 
flight  in  Rhode  Island  in  1904. 

The  Bartramian  sandpiper,  commonly  known  as  the  up- 
land plover,  a  bird  which  formerly  bred  on  grassy  hills  all 
over  the  State,  and  migrated  southward  along  our  coasts  in 
great  flocks,  is  in  imminent  danger  of  extirpation.  Thirty- 
five  years  ago  these  birds  bred  commonly  within  the  city  limits 
of  Worcester,  about  Fitchburg  and  in  the  country  around 
and  between  those  cities.  A  few  still  breed  in  Worces- 
ter and  Berkshire  counties,  on  Nantucket,  and  possibly 
elsewhere  in  the  State,  so  that  there  is  still  a  nucleus,  which, 
if  protected,  may  save  the  species.  Their  former  abundance 
is  shown  by  some  of  the  statements  of  the  older  gunners. 
"  When  I  was  a  boy,  nine  years  old,  my  father  killed  ninety 
upland  plover  in  one  day.  He  killed  sixteen  without  pick- 
ing one  up."  (Gerry.)  This  was  about  seventy-five  years 
ago,  in  the  days  of  muzzle-loading  guns.  "Breeding  birds, 
or  those  living  on  Nantucket,  have  fallen  off  66  per  cent  in 
the  last  fifteen  years."  (Mackay.)  "Upland  plover  ex- 
tinct here  from  hunting,  but  breeds  sparingly  in  northern 
Worcester  County."  (W.  S.  Perry,  Worcester.)  Five 
reports  from  localities  where  this  bird  formerly  bred  give  it 
as  nearing  extinction,  and  four  as  extinct.  This  is  one  of 
the  most  useful  of  all  birds  in  grass-land,  feeding  largely  on 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIEDS.  467 

grasshoppers  and  cut-worms.  It  is  one  of  the  finest  of  all 
birds  for  the  table.  An  effort  should  be  made  at  once  to 
save  this  useful  species. 

The  pectoral  sandpiper,  or  grass  bird,  formerly  wonderfully 
abundant  in  the  fall  migrations  on  the  salt  marshes  and 
meadows  by  the  sea,  has  been  common  until  very  recently, 
and  was  abundant  occasionally  up  to  within  about  twelve 
years  ago,  when  I  last  followed  the  marsh  birds.  I  have 
been  somewhat  surprised  to  hear  from  Mr.  Mackay  that  this 
species  is  no  longer  common  in  migration.  He  says  they 
&eem  to  have  almost  disappeared.  A  few  are  seen  occasion- 
ally in  bad  weather.  Mr.  Gerry  says  he  has  not  now  seen  a 
good  flight  for  about  ten  years.  He  also  says  that  the  last 
really  good  marsh  shooting  he  had  in  Massachusetts  was 
about  thirty  years  ago.  He  left  the  hotel  at  Wellfleet  at 
noon  in  a  carriage,  accompanied  by  Mrs.  Gerry ;  he  fired 
twenty-three  shots,  killed  sixty-seven  birds,  mainly  beetle- 
heads,  jack  curlews  and  willets,  and  was  back  at  the  hotel 
at  4.30  P.M.  Mrs.  Gerry  held  the  horse  and  kept  tally  of 
the  shots  fired.  There  is  no  difference  of  opinion  in  regard 
to  the  diminution  of  the  shore  birds ;  the  reports  from  all 
quarters  are  the  same.  It  is  noteworthy  that  practically  all 
observers  agree  that,  considering  all  species,  these  birds  have 
fallen  off  about  75  per  cent  within  twenty-five  to  forty  years, 
and  that  several  species  are  nearly  extirpated. 

Snipe  and  Woodcock.  —  The  Wilson's  snipe  is  one  of  the 
most  "  shot  at"  birds  of  the  American  fauna,  and,  consider- 
ing the  amount  of  ammunition  that  has  been  expended  on 
it,  it  has  not  decreased  in  numbers  so  much  as  might  have 
been  expected.  Nevertheless,  far  fewer  birds  are  now  seen 
in  Massachusetts  in  spring  and  fall  than  formerly  were  found 
in  our  meadows  at  those  seasons.  There  is  a  legend  in 
Concord,  told  me  by  Mr.  William  Brewster,  that  years  ago 
a  certain  gunner  won,  in  a  few  hours,  a  wager  that  he  could 
kill  fifty  snipe  with  a  limited  number  of  shots  on  the  Con- 
cord meadows.  There  is  much  shooting  done  there  now, 
but  each  gunner  gets  comparatively  few  birds. 

The  woodcock  formerly  bred  abundantly  in  small  swamps 
and  alder  runs  throughout  the  State.  Thirty  years  ago  it 


408  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

bred  in  all  suitable  places  about  Worcester,  but  within  ten 
years  from  that  time  the  breeding  birds  were  shot  off.  Mr. 

\f 

Gerry  has  kindly  lent  me  a  memorandum  book  kept  by  his 
father,  Col.  E.  Gerry,  in  1838.  He  tells  me  that  the  wood- 
cock recorded  in  this  book  were  shot  about  Stoneham.  Colonel 
Gerry  commenced  to  shoot  woodcock  in  July,  therefore  the 
birds  shot  must  have  been  those  breeding  in  the  locality.  On 
July  7  he  shot  twenty-two,  for  which  he  received  only  two 
dollars  and  seventy-five  cents ;  on  the  8th  he  shot  and  sold 
forty-two;  on  the  9th,  nine;  on  the  16th,  twenty  ;  on  the 
21st,  six;  on  the  22d,  twelve;  on  the  23d,  fifteen;  on  the 
27th,  eight.  On  the  llth  he  shot  twenty-seven  ''birds," 
probably  woodcock,  by  the  price.  These  woodcock  were 
sold  in  Boston  at  twelve  and  one-half  to  twenty-five  cents 
each.  After  the  first  of  August  the  score  of  woodcock  shot 
falls  off  rapidly.  Here  are  one  hundred  sixty-one  resident 
woodcock,  young  and  adult  birds,  killed  by  "one  man  close 
to  Boston  in  July.  There  were  no  doubt  many  other 
shooters  operating  about  the  city.  No  wonder  that  breed- 
ing woodcock  disappeared  rapidly  from  the  region  near 
Boston.  The  woodcock  is  decreasing  all  over  its  range  in 
the  east,  and  needs  the  most  stringent  protection.  Of 
thirty-eight  Massachusetts  reports,  thirty-six  state  that 
woodcock  are  decreasing,  rare  or  extinct,  while  one  states 
that  they  are  holding  their  own,  and  one  that  they  are  in- 
creasing slightly  since  the  law  was  passed  prohibiting  their 
sale.  These  reports  refer  mainly  to  birds  breeding  in 
Massachusetts.  In  the  fall  of  1904,  in  a  few  sections,  there 
was  a  good  flight  of  birds  from  the  north.* 

Family  Tetraonidm.  —  Grouse  and  Partridges. 
Mention  already  has  been  made  of  the  bob-white  or  quail, 
our  only  representative  of  the  partridge  family,  as  a  sufferer 
from  the  effects  of  the  winter  of  1903.  Another  severe  win- 
ter followed  the  hunting  season  of  1904,  and  the  quail  now 
needs  more  protection.  The  heath  hen,  formerly  common 
over  much  of  New  England  and  the  middle  States,  has 
been  extirpated  everywhere  within  the  last  century  except 

*  Since  the  above  was  written  reports  of  an  increase  of  breeding  birds  have 
come  in  from  "Worcester  and  Middlesex  counties. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  469 

in  Martha's  Vineyard.  Dr.  J.  A.  Allen  says  that  prairie 
chickens  were  introduced  there,*  but,  if  so,  they  have  prob- 
ably died  out  as  they  have  in  other  places  in  the  east.  The 
heath  hen  is  a  hardy  bird,  and  possibly  might  be  propagated, 
and,  under  protection,  restored  to  our  woodlands. 

The  ruffed  grouse,  or  partridge,  the  king  of  all  our  game 
birds,  has  decreased  greatly  in  numbers  over  most  of  the 
State  within  the  last  half-century.  No  doubt  there  are  gun- 
ners who  kill  nearly  as  many  birds  now  as  were  killed  by 
individuals  fifty  years  ago,  but  those  Avho  do  this  do  it  by 
covering  a  great  deal  more  ground  than  was  necessary  then, 
and  they  are  merely  bringing  the  birds  nearer  to  extermina- 
tion. The  decrease  is  estimated  at  from  50  to  75  per  cent. 
Forty-six  observers  report  the  grouse  as  diminishing  in 
numbers,  three  say  grouse  are  holding  their  own,  Avhile  only 
five  report  an  increase.  The  species  is  extremely  hardy, 
and,  naturally,  its  increase  is  affected  by  only  the  most 
severe  and  unusual  inclemencies  of  the  weather. 

Family  Columbidce.  —  Pigeons  and  Doves. 

The  wild,  or  passenger,  pigeon,  once  so  abundant  here, 
is  now  practically  extirpated.  It  is  of  interest  to  note  a  re- 
cent report  of  the  occurrence  of  the  passenger  pigeon,  which 
seems  to  be  authentic.  Mr.  Clayton  E.  Stone  of  Lunen- 
burg  reports  seeing  a  flock  of  twenty-three  birds  there  on 
May  6,  1896.  Another  instance  is  mentioned  in  the  report 
of  the  Massachusetts  Fish  and  Game  Commission  for  1903. 

The  mourning  dove  is  reported  as  decreasing,  rare  or 
extinct  by  thirty-nine  observers ;  a  few  others  report  it  as 
wanting  in  their  localities,  or  as  unchanged  in  numbers. 
These  reports  come  from  every  county  in  the  State  except 
Dukes,  Nantucket  and  Franklin,  from  which  no  report  on 
this  bird  has  been  received.  The  only  cases  of  increase  are 
reported  from  Bristol  and  Worcester  counties.  Miss  Agnes 
G.  Barnes  of  Plymouth  says  the  species  is  increasing,  after 
almost  total  extinction.  Miss  Abbie  Churchill  of  Fitchburg 
sa}rs  the  bird  has  been  seen  recently  "for  the  first  time"  at 
Fitchburg.  Col.  J.  E.  Thayer  says  the  doves  are  increasing 
at  Lancaster,  and  S.  F.  Stockwell  says-  they  are  scarce  but 

*  "  Memorial  history  of  Boston,"  Vol.  1,  p.  12. 


470  BOAKD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

increasing  at  Millbury.  I  have  seen  rather  more  of  these 
birds  than  usual  in  Middlesex  County  this  season,  but  from 
the  reports  it  seems  probable  that  the  species  is  in  some 
danger  of  extirpation.  As  against  the  encouraging  reports 
from  "Worcester  County,  there  are  eight  pessimistic  ones  from 
the  same  county. 

Family  Bubonidas.  — Horned  Owls,  etc. 

Thirty  observers  report  owls  as  decreasing,  ten  report 
them  as  unchanged  in  numbers,  three  report  an  increase. 
The  increase  is  reported  only  from  Franklin  and  Berkshire 
counties.  The  decrease  is  most  marked  in  Worcester  and 
the  eastern  counties,  but  there  are  four  reports  of  decrease 
from  Berkshire  County. 

While  the  larger  owls  appear  to  be  decreasing  generally 
in  eastern  Massachusetts,  and  breeding  great  horned  owls 
have  disappeared  from  many  sections,  the  screech  owl  is 
still  locally  common. 

Family  Falconidce.  —  Eagles  and  Hawks. 

This  family  has  been  long  regarded  as  decreasing  in  east- 
ern Massachusetts,  and  the  present  inquiry  confirms  that 
impression.  Twenty-eight  persons  report  eagles  as  de- 
creasing, and  most  others  report  them  as  very  rare,  or  even 
nearing  extinction.  Mr.  W.  R.  Stearns  of  Pittsfield,  Berk- 
shire County,  however,  says  that  he  sees  a  slight  increase 
in  the  number  of  eagles  there.  The  golden  eagle  is  very 
rare,  but  has  been  noted  occasionally  within  twenty  years. 
The  bald  eagle  is  not  rare  at  some  localities  along  the  coast, 
especially  in  Plymouth  and  Barnstable  counties ;  but  old 
gunners  say  that  it  is  not  nearly  so  common  as  years  ago. 

Hawks  are  reported  as  generally  decreasing  by  thirty- 
seven  observers  ;  others  report  them  as  rare ;  seventeen,  as 
in  usual  numbers ;  but  thirteen  note  an  increase.  The  re- 
ports of  increase  come  mainly  from  Berkshire,  Hampshire 
and  Franklin  counties ;  some  come  from  the  outlying  towns 
of  Worcester  County.  Only  five  observers  east  of  Worces- 
ter County  see  any  increase  in  the  number  of  hawks,  and 
these  are  from  the  more  remote  towns.  East  from  Worces- 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  471 

ter  County  thirty-one  report  a  decrease  ;  west  from  Worces- 
ter County  six  note  an  increase  and  four  a  decrease.  The 
reports  seem  to  indicate  that  hawks,  especially  the  larger 
species,  while  on  the  whole  diminishing  in  eastern  Massa- 
chusetts, are  at  least  holding  their  own  generally  in  the 
western  counties,  except  perhaps  in  Berkshire,  where  the 
correspondence  indicates  a  falling  off  in  some  sections. 
The  reports  are  not  detailed  enough  to  enable  many  com- 
parisons to  be  made  as  to  the  relative  scarcity  of  the  spe- 
cies, but  the  red-tailed  hawk  seems  to  have  fallen  off  as 
much  as  any.  On  the  other  hand,  the  red-shouldered  hawk, 
while  decreasing  locally,  seems  to  be  holding  its  own  in 
many  localities,  and  even  occupying  more  territory  than 
formerly.  This  seems  to  indicate  that  it  is,  in  a  measure, 
taking  the  place  of  the  redtail  in  the  breeding  season  in 
the  eastern  part  of  the  State,  where  the  former  is  growing 
rare.  The  marsh  hawk  seems  to  hold  its  ground  fairly 
well  in  south-eastern  Massachusetts  and  also  in  some  other 
parts  of  the  State. 

Family  Cowidce.  —  Croivs  and  Jays. 

Crows  are  reported  to  be  diminishing  by  only  four  ob- 
servers and  increasing  by  eighteen.  Eleven  of  the  latter 
come  from  west  of  Worcester  County,  which  may  indicate 
that  crows  are  increasing  somewhat  in  the  western  counties, 
as  those  making  reports  from  that  region  are  much  fewer 
than  those  from  the  eastern  part  of  the  State.  The  blue  jay, 
while  decreasing  locally,  seems  generally  to  hold  its  own. 

Most  of  the  birds,  other  than  those  already  reported  on, 
are  such  as  are  generally  included  by  our  law-makers  under 
the  head  of 

SONG  AND  INSECTIVOROUS  BIRDS. 

After  careful  study  of  the  detailed  reports  received  on 
many  species,  it  is  impossible  to  escape  the  belief  that  cer- 
tain of  the  smaller  birds  have  decreased  in,  or  disappeared 
from,  some  densely  populated  regions.  It  is  quite  evident 
that,  in  some  cases,  a  recent  diminution  in  numbers  was 
caused  by  the  unfavorable  weather  conditions  of  1904,  and 
that,  had  it  not  been  for  this  cause,  no  decrease  would  have 


472  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

been  noted.  Wherever  enough  reports  regarding  any  fam- 
ily or  species  have  been  received  to  warrant  drawing  con- 
elusions,  they  will  be  given. 

In  regard  to  the  cuckoos,  kingfishers  and  woodpeckers 
there  is  not  sufficient  evidence  on  which  to  base  anything 
more  than  an  assumption  that  they  are  in  general  maintain- 
ing their  former  status.  The  northern  flicker,  gaffer  wood- 
pecker, high-hole,  pigeon  woodpecker  or  "wood  pigeon," 
is  believed  by  some  to  be  diminishing  rapidly,  and  this  is 
probably  true  in  some  localities,  but  generally  its  numbers 
are  being  well  maintained.  Twelve  observers  report  it  as 
diminishing ;  twenty-four,  as  holding  its  own  ;  and  twelve, 
as  increasing.  Four  of  the  reports  showing  a  decrease  are 
from  south-eastern  Massachusetts,  and  the  cause  attributed 
is  the  hard  winter  of  1903-04.  Six  of  the  others  came  from 
regions  in  Middlesex  County  where  the  birds  probably  have 
decreased  from  palpable  causes. 

Family  Caprimulgidce. 

The  Wltip-poor-will  and  the  Nighthawk. —  Six  reports 
mention  a  recent  sudden  decrease  or  an  absence  of  the  whip- 
poor-will,  which  may  or  may  not  be  a  result  of  the  June 
storms  of  1903  ;  but  there  is  much  evidence  that  the  night- 
hawk  has  been  diminishing  for  years  in  certain  sections. 
Twenty-four  observers  report  it  as  diminishing,  very  rare 
or  absent,  where  it  was  formerly  common.  Seventeen  see 
no  change  in  their  localities,  but  only  eight  report  the  bird 
as  increasing  or  abundant.  The  decrease  is  reported  from 
Berkshire,  Franklin,  Hampshire,  Middlesex,  Norfolk  and 
Bristol  counties,  which  comprise  much  the  greater  part  of 
the  State.  In  Essex  County  the  species  seems  to  be  hold- 
ing its  own,  or  in  some  cases  increasing.  We  have  Barn- 
stable,  Nantucket  and  Dukes  counties  yet  to  hear  from.  In 
some  localities  in  all  parts  of  the  State  nighthawks  seem  to 
be  holding  their  own  ;  but  the  evidence  of  competent  ob- 
servers seems  to  agree,  in  the  main,  with  my  own  experi- 
ence,—  that  they  are  decreasing  over  large  areas.  Mr. 
William  Brewster,  who  has  kept  careful  records  of  the 
number  of  birds  seen  and  heard,  says  that  nighthawks 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  473 

« 

have  been  decreasing  for  years  in  the  region  about  Cam- 
bridge and  Concord.  Mr.  C.  E.  Bailey  reports  them  now 
as  growing  rare  in  those  sections  with  which  he  is  familiar. 
The  evidence  from  portions  of  south-eastern  Massachusetts, 
as  well  as  many  regions  in  the  western  counties,  seems  to 
indicate  that  these  birds  are  now  generally  rather  uncom- 
mon there.  A  large  part  of  Worcester  County,  however, 
seems  to  be  well  supplied  with  them.  It  is  impossible  to 
make  any  accurate  statement  of  the  areas  in  which  they 
have  decreased  without  a  careful  canvass  of  the  whole 
State. 

The  Meadowlark  and  Bobolink. — It  is  quite  generally 
believed  that  the  meadowlark  and  bobolink  have  diminished 
because  of  the  early  cutting  of  the  grass  in  fields  and  meadows 
since  the  general  introduction  of  mowing  machines.  Where 
the  grass  is  cut  in  June,  the  eggs  or  the  young  of  these  birds, 
even  if  escaping  injury  by  the  machine,  are  exposed  to  the 
heat  of  the  sun  and  the  attacks  of  their  enemies.  This  in- 
quiry gives  some  evidence  of  a  decrease  of  these  species, 
but  not  so  much  as  might  have  been  expected.  Thirty-six 
observers  report  meadowlarks  as  decreasing;  eighteen,  as 
unchanged ;  twenty-three,  as  increasing.  The  reports  of 
decrease  come  mainly  from  Berkshire,  Hampshire,  Worces- 
ter, Norfolk  and  Bristol  counties.  Indications  of  a  recent 
decrease  appear  in  a  portion  of  Barnstable  County.  The 
reports  of  the  birds  holding  their  own  come  mainly  from 
Middlesex  and  Franklin  counties ;  while  the  reports  of  in- 
crease seem  to  be  local  and  nowhere  general,  as  they  are 
scattered  through  all  the  counties  except  Norfolk,  Barnsta- 
ble, Dukes  and  Nantucket.  All  this  seems  to  indicate  a 
general  decrease  in  only  Hampshire,  Worcester,  Norfolk 
and  Bristol  counties,  and  even  in  these  counties  it  is  by  no 
means  universal. 

Only  fourteen  reports  are  made  upon  the  bobolink ;  twelve 
report  it  as  decreasing  or  becoming  very  rare,  and  two  as 
increasing.  This  bird  is  probably  diminishing  in  Massa- 
chusetts, but,  as  most  of  the  reports  are  from  Middlesex 
and  Worcester  counties,  it  is  impossible  to  tell  how  general 
the  diminution  has  become. 


474  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

* 

Family  Himndinidce.  —  The  Swallows. 

Even  previous  to  the  injury  done  by  the  destructive  rain 
storms  of  June,  1903,  it  seems  probable  that  the  swallow 
family  was  represented  by  far  fewer  colonies  and  individ- 
uals in  Massachusetts  than  it  was  thirty  to  forty  years  ago. 
Many  observers  have  seen  a  decrease  in  some  species  within 
ten  years.  Some  report  a  gradual  decrease  of  all  species, 
while  comparatively  few  report  an  increase,  except  of  the 
tree  swallow.  This  species  was  greatly  diminished  in  the 
winter  of  1895  by  a  cold  wave  in  the  south,  and  since  then 
has  been  recovering  its  numbers,  which  may  account  for 
the  increase  noted  locally.  Twelve  observers  report  an  in- 
crease of  the  bird,  eighteen  report  numbers  unchanged,  and 
thirty-two  report  a  decrease.  The  increase  comes  mainly 
in  Hampden,  Franklin  and  Berkshire  counties.  Although 
some  persons  in  these  counties  report  this  swallow  to  be  de- 
creasing, the  reports  of  decrease  are  distributed  generally 
among  all  the  counties  on  the  mainland. 

Eleven  observers  report  an  increase  of  barn  swallows, 
twenty-one  report  that  their  numbers  are  as  usual,  and  forty- 
one  report  a  decrease.  Franklin  is  the  only  county  in 
which  the  reports  of  increase  outnumber  those  of  decrease. 
In  this  county  also  and  in  Middlesex  and  Essex  counties 
there  are  the  greatest  number  of  reports  that  the  bird  is 
holding  its  own.  From  Middlesex  there  are  nine  reports  of 
a  decrease,  but  also  eight  that  the  numbers  have  not  changed. 
Two  report  an  increase.  All  reports  from  Suffolk  County 
indicate  a  decrease,  as  might  be  expected  from  the  accession 
of  population  ;  but  the  same  is  true  of  Plymouth  County, 
where  there  are  few  cities. 

The  cliff  swallow  or  eave  swallow  is  reported  by  only 
eight  observers  as  increasing,  as  holding  its  own  by  sixteen, 
and  decreasing  or  extinct  by  thirty-two.  Most  of  those 
who  find  the  cliff  swallow  decreasing  agree  that  this  has 
been  going  on  for  twenty  to  thirty  years.  This  bird  was 
originally  a  native  of  the  west,  where  it  built  its  mud  nests 
on  cliffs  overhanging  rivers.  Its  eastern  movement,  which 
began  in  the  time  of  Audubon  (when  it  followed  civilization 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  475 

eastward,  nesting  under  the  eaves  of  the  settlers'  buildings) , 
ended  probably  about  1850.  At  that  tune  these  birds  had 
established  colonies  over  a  large  part  of  New  England,  and 
were  very  abundant  in  the  farming  communities  of  Massa- 
chusetts. Soon  after  the  introduction  and  spread  of  the 
English  sparrow  they  began  to  decrease,  and  have  dimin- 
ished until  their  colonies  in  the  eastern  part  of  Massachu- 
setts are  now  much  fewer  than  formerly.  So  many  reports 
have  come  in  of  the  abandonment  of  nest  sites  and  so  few 
of  the  establishment  of  new  colonies  that  one  can  only 
wonder  where  the  birds  have  gone. 

The  reports  from  Plymouth  and  Bristol  counties  seem  to 
show  that  bank  swallows  are  decreasing,  as  all  observers  who 
report  at  all.  on  this  species  regard  it  as  diminishing.  The 
reports  from  the  other  counties  are  not  so  definite,  except 
from  Essex  County,  where  they  are  now  said  to  be  increasing. 

In  my  special  report  published  last  year  the  following 
statement  was  made  :  "It  has  been  said  that  there  are  no 
bank  swallows  in  Essex  County."  *  This  statement  was 
published  on  the  authority  of  a  friend,  who  made  rather  an 
exhaustive  canvass  of  the  county  about  1895,  and  found  that 
the  breeding  birds  had  disappeared  from  all  localities  where 
they  were  formerly  known,  so  far  as  he  could  learn.  The 
published  statement  brought  information  from  three  differ- 
ent parts  of  the  county,  showing  that  bank  swallows  are 
still  breeding  there,  and  increasing  rather  than  diminishing. 
While  the  evidence  regarding  the  entire  State  seems  to  indi- 
cate a  rather  general  decrease  of  these  birds,  it  is  not  so 
convincing  as  in  the  case  of  either  the  barn  or  cliff  swallows. 
In  looking  over  all  the  evidence,  it  seems  as  if  these  two 
species  have  decreased  most  in  the  eastern  part  of  the  State, 
while  the  purple  martin  has,  up  to  1903,  decreased  most  in 
the  western  counties.  On  the  whole,  the  evidence  of  com- 
petent observers  agrees  with  my  own  observation,  which 
indicates  that  breeding  swallows  have  been  diminishing 
gradually  for  thirty  years,  although  they  still  hold  their 
own  in  many  localities. 

The  only  other  .significant  or  progressive  decrease  of  a 

*  "Agriculture  of  Massachusetts,"  1903,  p.  479. 


476  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

species  as  shown  by  these  reports  is  that  of  the  house  wren. 
Five  observers  report  an  increase,  eight  report  the  numbers 
unchanged,  and  thirty-eight  report  the  birds  as  decreasing, 
becoming  extinct,  or  absent  in  the  breeding  season.  When 
it  is  considered  that  these  reports  come  mainly  from  local- 
ities where  the  house  wren  was  once  common,  their  signifi- 
cance is  apparent.  Thirty  or  forty  years  ago  the  bird  was 
found  about  many  of  the  cities  in  Massachusetts  ;  now  it  is 
rarely  seen.  It  seems  to  be  decreasing  in  every  county  on 
the  mainland.  In  my  own  experience  this  bird  has  become 
rare  or  wanting,  within  thirty  years,  in  nearly  every  locality 
where  I  once  knew  it  to  be  common. 

There  is  some  evidence  that  the  red-headed  woodpecker 
was  common  locally  at  one  time.  The  Rev.  T.  B.  Forbush 
told  me  in  1870  that  it  was  common  about  Westborough, 
Worcester  County,  up  to  about  1830.  He  knew  the  bird 
well,  and  identified  it  at  sight.  Mr.  J.  M.  VanHuyck  of 
Lee,  Berkshire  County,  writes  that  the  red-head  was  once 
common  there,  and  that  a  pair  formerly  nested  in  a  hole  in 
an  old  balm-of-gilead  tree  on  his  farm.  A  pair  was  reported 
to  me  as  breeding  in  Worcester  County  in  1878,  but  I  had 
no  chance  to  verify  this,  as  both  birds  were  shot  by  a  col- 
lector. 

The  wood  thrush  is  markedly  decreasing  in  some  localities, 
but  this  is  fully  made  up  by  its  increase  in  others.  Warblers 
generally  appear  to  be  decreasing  in  Plymouth,  Bristol  and 
Barnstable  counties  and  parts  of  Worcester  County,  but  the 
decrease  may  be  mainly  due  to  the  weather  conditions  of 
1903.  Taking  the  State  as  a  whole,  the  reports  of  increase 
and  decrease  are  quite  evenly  balanced.  The  same  is  true 
of  the  thrush  family ;  eighteen  report  an  increase,  fourteen 
no  change,  and  seventeen  a  decrease. 

The  rose-breasted  grosbeak  is  reported  as  increasing  in 
thirteen  different  localities  and  as  decreasing  in  only  two. 
From  my  own  experience,  and  from  comparing  notes  with 
others,  I  have  come  to  believe  that  this  bird  has  been  increas- 
ing and  spreading  slowly  in  Massachusetts  for  about  forty 
years.  It  seems  now  much  more  common  and  generally 
dispersed  than  it  was  thirty  years  ago.  It  seems  to  have 


Xo.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  477 

adapted  itself  to  changing  conditions,  and  has  come  out 
of  the  woods  and  into  the  villages  more  than  formerly. 
Whether  the  advent  and  increase  of  the  Colorado  potato 
beetle,  on  which  it  feeds,  has  had  anything  to  do  with  this, 
is,  perhaps,  worth  investigating. 

Some  observers  report  an  increase  of  the  scarlet  tanager, 
but  others  report  a  decrease,  and  the  account  nearly  balances. 
My  own  impression  is  that  this  bird  was  not  so  common 
thirty  years  ago  as  now,  but  it  fluctuates  in  numbers  from 
year  to  year.  A  few  species  beside  the  rose-breasted  gros- 
beak evidently  are  increasing.  Forty-four  observers  report 
the  robin  as  increasing;  four,  no  change;  and  seven,  de- 
creasing. A  similar  though  less  marked  increase  is  reported 
of  the  bluebird  and  song  sparrow. 

THE  CAUSES  OF  THE  DECREASE  OF  BIRDS. 

In  considering  the  causes  of  bird  destruction,  as  men- 
tioned in  these  reports  and  letters,  it  becomes  evident  that 
man  and  his  works  are  of  the  most  importance.  Beside 
man  all  other  destructive  forces  dwindle  into  insignificance. 
The  destruction  of  birds  by  the  elements  or  by  their  natural 
enemies  is  not  to  be  compared  for  a  moment  with  that  in- 
flicted by  man  on  all  species  that  come  within  the  scope  of 
his  wants.  Man's  persecution  is  annual  and  perennial.  It 
gives  a  species  no  chance  to  recover.  It  seldom  stops  short 
of  extermination,  unless  restrained  by  stringent  laws  effi- 
ciently enforced. 

JIan  the  Exterminator. 

The  reports  on  the  diminution  of  bird-life,  as  caused 
directly  or  indirectly  by  man,  may  be  tabulated  as  follows 
to  show  the  relative  importance  of  each  cause  :  — 


478 


BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 


Number 

of  Observers 

reporting. 


Sportsmen,  or  «« so-called  sportsmen,"     . 
Italians  and  other  foreigners,  . 
Cutting  off  timber  and  shrubbery,   . 

Market  hunters, 

Bird  shooters  and  trappers, 
Egg  collectors,  boys  and  others, 

Milliners1  hunters, 

Draining  marshes  and  meadows, 
Gun  clubs  and  hunting  contests, 
Telegraph,  telephone  and  other  wires, 
Electric  or  trolley  roads, 

Railroads, 

Automobiles,  ...... 

Telephones, 


82 

70 

62 

57 

32 

32 

18 

17 

16 

3 

2 

1 

1 

1 


The  man  "behind  the  gun"  is,  of  all  men,  the  most 
destructive  to  birds.  The  shooter,  therefore,  must  head 
the  list. 

Sportsmen  and  Market  Hunters.  —  Sportsmen  and  ' '  so- 
called  sportsmen  "  are  given  the  chief  place  as  bird  destroyers. 
The  number  of  observers  who  report  them  as  such  is  con- 
siderably in  excess  of  those  who  name  market  hunters. 
This  is  rather  surprising,  until  we  consider  the  increase  in 
the  number  of  sportsmen  in  the  past  fifty  years. 

Every  city  now  has  its  gun  club  or  sportsman's  club,  and 
so  have  some  towns.  The  members  practise  to  obtain  pro- 
ficiency in  shooting  on  the  wing.  Even  the  boys  have  clubs 
of  their  own,  in  some  places,  where  they  practise  at  trap- 
shooting.  Forty  years  ago  there  were  comparatively  few 
good  wing  shots.  Since  the  invention  of  the  glass  ball  and 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  479 

clay  pigeon  they  have  become  a  legion.  The  number  of 
trained  setters,  pointers  and  retrievers  also  has  increased 
greatly.  Mr.  H.  R.  Packard  of  Attleborough  writes  that 
there  are  at  least  seventy-five  hunters  provided  with  bird 
dogs  now,  where  there  were  only  three  bird  dogs  in  the 
town  thirty  years  ago.  A  man  who  knows  very  little  of 
the  habits  of  the  birds  can  find  birds  with  a  dog.  A  well- 
trained  dog  enables  the  sportsman  to  find  and  follow  birds 
to  the  death  when  once  started. 

The  improvement  in  modern  firearms  renders  the  sports- 
man of  to-day  far  more  dangerous  to  the  birds  than  was 
his  great-grandfather  with  the  uncertain  flintlock.  In  olden 
times  the  sportsman  must  do  the  best  he  could  with  his 
single  shot  (when  the  gun  did  not  miss  fire).  Then  came 
the  percussion  cap,  the  double  gun,  the  breech-loader,  the 
"  pump  gun,"  and  now  we  have  the  rapid-firing  automatic 
gun.  With  this  a  passing  flock  can  be  followed  with  a  per- 
fect rain  of  shot.  The  association  of  sportsmen  into  clubs 
facilitates  the  general  spread  of  knowledge  about  favorable 
covers  or  stands.  Xo  sooner  are  game  birds  plentiful  any- 
where, than  the  newspapers  publish  the  fact  for  all  the  world 
to  read  and  profit  by.  Railroads  widely  advertise  all  places 
along  their  routes  where  game  can  be  found.  Hotel  keepers 
publish  the  advantages  their  neighborhoods  afford  to  shooters. 
The  telegraph  and  telephone  cany  to  the  cities  the  news  of 
the  arrival  of  flights  of  birds.  The  railroads,  steamboats 
and  trolley  cars  convey  the  shooters  immediately  to  the 
spot. 

Let  us  see  how  these  various  agencies  work  in  the  de- 
struction of  shore  birds.  A  flight  of  birds  is  seen  some 
day  on  the  shores  of  Cape  Cod.  This  news  is  immediately 
telephoned  to  Boston.  The  favored  ones  get  it,  and  that 
night  the  trains  take  them  to  the  ground.  The  next  morn- 
ing they  join  with  the  local  gunners  in  what  is  virtually  an 
attempt  to  kill  every  bird.  If  the  daily  papers  publish  the 
news,  every  gunner  who  reads  it  can  take  advantage  of 
the  opportunity,  and  be  on  the  ground  within  twenty-four 
hours.  When  the  ducks  and  geese  are  flying,  men  go  and 
live  in  brush  houses  built  at  the  ponds,  or  conceal  themselves 


480  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

in  blinds,  or  follow  the  birds  in  boats.  The  deadly  "  pump 
gun  "  makes  it  almost  impossible  for  a  flock  to  get  safely  by 
a  good  shot.  In  the  winter  of  1900-01  I  observed  some 
modern  duck-shooting  in  Florida.  The  members  of  a  cer- 
tain shooting  club  that  had  bought  a  large  tract  of  marshes 
were  accustomed  to  lie  in  blinds  in  favorable  localities,  where 
they  shot  so  many  ducks  that  they  could  not  possibly  make 
use  of  them.  These  ducks  were  kindly  given  away  to  people 
who  lived  in  a  region  within  twenty  miles  of  the  club- 
house. A  sportsman  occupying  a  blind  and  putting  out  his 
decoys  would  have  men  in  boats  to  go  about  and  start  the 
ducks,  that  they  might  be  attracted  to  his  decoys.  I  am 
credibly  informed  that  at  least  one  of  these  gentlemen  had 
several  "pump  guns"  in  his  blind,  with  a  man  to  keep 
them  loaded,  and,  being  a  very  quick  and  accurate  shot,  he 
was  able,  once  at  least,  to  kill  in  this  way  over  one  hundred 
ducks  in  less  than  two  hours.  Such  shooting  as  this  is 
probably  exceptional.  It  only  shows  what  can  be  done 
toward  exterminating  the  birds  by  the  modern  sportsman, 
using  modern  methods,  and  without  the  effort  of  stirring 
from  his  tracks.  There  are  many  sportsmen,  of  course, 
who  will  neither  practise  nor  countenance  such  slaughter ; 
but  there  are  too  many  gunners  who,  like  the  market 
hunter,  are  out  to  kill  as  many  birds  as  possible.  Market 
hunters  are  still  numerous,  but  are  probably  not  increasing 
greatly  in  numbers,  for  game  is  becoming  too  scarce  to 
make  hunting  very  profitable,  even  at  the  high  prices  now 
paid;  and  the  law  in  Massachusetts  now  (1904)  forbids  the 
marketing  of  the  grouse  or  woodcock.  A  large  proportion 
of  the  market  hunters  are  law-abiding  citizens,  and  will  not 
shoot  much  unless  they  can  sell  their  birds  legally  ;  but  there 
are  some  who  will  kill  birds  at  any  season,  and  sell  them  to 
epicures,  hotels  and  road  houses. 

Hunting  Contests.  —  Hunting  contests  or  side  hunts  are 
still  indulged  in  by  many  gun  clubs.  While  these  hunts 
may  be  conducted  within  the  law,  the  spirit  of  the  contest 
is  wrong,  for  each  contestant  strives  to  kill  as  many  birds 
as  possible,  that  his  own  side  may  win,  and  that  the  other 
side  may  pay  for  the  dinner  which  is  to  follow.  Barrels 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  481 

of  birds  and  game  have  been  killed  in  these  hunts.  Nothing 
tends  more  to  exterminate  the  birds  and  game  than  these 
contests,  and,  the  contestants  being  out  to  kill  all  they  can, 
some  are  sure  to  kill  birds  other  than  game  birds.  All 
large  birds  and  many  small  ones  suffer.  This  association 
of  hunters  in  rivalry  to  kill  game  is  a  blot  on  the  history  of 
civilization.  It  goes  beyond  the  rapacity  of  the  savage. 
The  native  Indians  expressed  disgust  when  they  first  saw 
the  white  men  engaging  in  this  kind  of  slaughter.  It 
should  be  prohibited  by  law. 

Italians  and  Other  Foreigners.  —  So  long  as  there  are 
shooters,  all  large  birds,  whether  game  birds  or  not,  are 
doomed  to  endless  persecution,  merely  because  they  make 
good  targets.  Herons,  hawks,  owls,  eagles  and  crows  are 
shot  at  sight,  whenever  opportunity  offers,  and  those  that 
escape  do  so  only  by  superior  cunning  and  agility.  Some 
of  our  hawks  and  owls  are  certainly  among  the  most  useful 
"6~f  all  birds,  but  this  group  suffers  particularly  at  the 
Tiands  of  the  sportsman  or  gunner,  because  some  hawks  and 
"owls  kill  some  of  the  game.  Farmers  and  poultrymen  shoot 
them  also. 

A  comparatively  new  element  of  danger  to  the  smaller 
birds,  and,  for  that  matter,  to  all  birds,  is  the  fast-increasing 
horde  of  foreigners,  mainly  Italians,  who  come  here  from 
their  native, lands  to  engage  in  contract  labor.  Most  of 
these  men  seem  to  be  sportsmen,  hunters  or  trappers  in 
their  way,  but  they  regard  everything  that  wears  fur  or 
feathers  as  game.  These  people  go  out  in  small  parties-, 
most  of  them  armed  with  guns,  and,  in  some  cases  at  least, 
shoot  at  nearly  every  living  thing  they  see.  I  have  been 
told  that  if  so  much  as  a  song  sparrow  gets  up,  the  whole 
party  shoots  at  it.  Some  of  these  gentry  came  into  my 
yard  in  Medford  in  1895,  and  shot  a  pair  of  bluebirds  that 
were  nesting  there.  The  birds  are  not  shot  for  profit,  for 
their  little  bodies  will  not  pay  for  half  the  ammunition  fired 
at  them.  They  are  shot  for  sport,  and  it  is  said  they  are 
afterwards  eaten.  These  people  also  trap  and  net  birds. 
Several  of  them  have  been  arrested  in  the  Middlesex  Fells 
Reservation  with  live  birds  in  baskets,  which  they  had 


482  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

caught  by  means  of  twigs  covered  with  bird-lime.  Blue- 
birds, orioles,  thrushes,  purple  finches  and  bobolinks  are 
favorites  with  these  trappers,  who  take  them  for  export  as 
cage  birds.  Most  of  the  birds  do  not  live  to  reach  Europe. 
Three  persons  speak  of  a  decrease  of  purple  finches  and  one 

of  a  decrease  of  bobolinks  from   this   cause.     Mr.   C.  J. 

• 

Maynard  of  Newton  writes  :  ' '  The  purple  finch  is  fast  going. 
I  have  not  seen  over  twenty  this  year.  Cause,  possibly 
trapping."  He  speaks  of  some  cases  of  trapping  which  he 
knew  of.  As  the  purple  finch  seems  to  be  holding  its  own 
at  a  distance  from  the  cities,  the  inroads  made  on  them  by 
trappers  near  Boston  and  other  cities  in  eastern  Massachu- 
setts may  account  for  a  local  decrease  there.  A  good  trap- 
per provided  with  decoy  birds  will  soon  have  most  of  the 
male  birds  in  a  neighborhood,  and  some  of  the  females. 
This  trapping  is  not  wholly  confined  to  foreigners,  but  no 
one  else  seems  to  use  bird-nets. 

Mr.  Wm.  X.  Prentiss,  a  deputy  of  the  Massachusetts 
Fish  and  Game  Commission,  writes  from  Milford,  Worces- 
ter County,  that  one  of  these  people  had  a  net,,  seventy-five 
feet  long  by  six  feet  high,  stretched  where  robins  and  other 
small  birds  came  to  drink  and  feed,  which  had  probably 
"destroyed  hundreds  of  birds,"  before  he  was  arrested. 
Italians  and  Greeks  are  the  people  principally  complained 
of.  This  shooting  and  trapping  by  foreigners  is  general. 
Complaints  on  this  score  came  in  as  follows  :  from  Berk- 
shire County,  eight ;  Hampden,  six ;  Hampshire,  two ; 
Franklin,  two ;  Worcester,  fourteen  ;  Middlesex,  twelve ; 
Essex,  nine  ;  Suffolk,  four ;  Plymouth,  two  ;  Bristol,  two  ; 
Norfolk,  six  ;  while  two  report  it  from  the  State  in  general. 

This  is  the  greatest  danger  which  now  threatens  the 
smaller  birds  of  Massachusetts  and  several  other  States. 
Mr.  H.  S.  Hathaway  of  Providence,  R.  I.,  writes  :  "  This 
fall  there  have  been  numerous  complaints  of  foreigners 
shooting  song  birds."  Complaints  of  this  sort  are  coming 
from  most  of  the  Atlantic  States.  In  the  South  Atlantic 
and  Gulf  States,  foreigners  and  natives,  especially  negroes, 
shoot  small  birds  in  winter  for  the  market.  Unless  we  pro- 
tect them  here  on  their  breeding  grounds  from  this  Euro- 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIKDS.  483 

pean  invasion,  their  numbers  must  soon  diminish,  as  has 
already  happened  in  some  parts  of  Italy  and  other  Mediter- 
ranean countries. 

Soys  with  Guns.  — Boys  with  guns  are  about  as  destruc- 
tive to  small  birds  as  foreigners.  The  "air  rifles"  and 
other  guns,  given  as  premiums  by  boys'  papers,  soap  manu- 
facturers and  others,  slay  their  thousands.  Dwight  Whiting 
wrote  some  years  since,  in  "The  Country  Gentleman,"  that 
one  boy's  record  for  his  air  rifle  was  four  hundred  and  sev- 
enty song  birds.  Several  of  his  companions  had  done  better 
than  this.  They  had  no  use  for  the  birds,  and  were  only 
shooting  for  a  record.  The  numerous  advertisements  of 
boys'  guns  show  that  they  meet  with  a  ready  and  profitable 
sale.  When  a  boy  is  out  with  a  gun  looking  for  legitimate 
game,  and  does  not  find  it,  he  will  shoot  something  else ; 
and  so  long  as  boys  are  allowed  to  carry  loaded  guns,  the 
small  birds  are  sure  to  suffer.  Very  few  boys  know  the 
game  laws.  Most  of  this  shooting  is  illegal,  and  the  boys 
should  be  arrested.  Miss  Juliet  Porter  writes  from  Worces- 
ter that  boys  there  are  shooting  English  sparrows  and  other 
native  sparrows,  confounding  one  with  the  other.  Such 
mistakes  will  always  be  made  if  boys  are  allowed  to  carry 
guns  of  any  kind. 

Milliners'  Hunters  and  Taxidermists. — Those  who  write 
of  milliners'  hunters  destroying  birds  seem  to  refer  mainly 
to  the  past,  as  the  demand  for  the  plumage  of  native  birds 
does  not  now  warrant  people  in  taking  the  risks  incurred  by 
breaking  the  laws  to  obtain  them.  This  was  once  a  very 
serious  evil  in  the  case  of  the  gulls  and  terns,  and  from 
1870  to  1880  it  was  a  menace  to  such  birds  as  orioles,  tan- 
agers  and  bluebirds  ;  but  shooting  of  small  birds  for  this 
purpose  probably  never  became  general  enough  in  Massa- 
chusetts to  do  very  serious  harm.  My  correspondence  on 
this  subject  indicates  that  very  few  men  are  now  hunting  in 
this  State  to  supply  milliners. 

Complaints  are  made  that  naturalists  or  taxidermists  shoot 
the  rarer  birds.  No  doubt  this  is  true,  but  it  is  usually  ille- 
gal, as  very  few  persons  now  have  permits  for  scientific  col- 
lecting. Whenever  such  conspicuous  birds  as  the  cardinal 


484  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

or  mocking  bird  establish  themselves  so  far  outside  their 
usual  range  as  Massachusetts,  enthusiastic  young  naturalists 
are  very  likely  to  secure  them.  Such  shooting  possibly 
may  prevent  the  gradual  extension  of  a  bird's  range. 

The  rage  for  collecting  birds'  skins  and  eggs,  which  was 
so  prevalent  among  school  boys  years  ago,  is  believed  to 
be  largely  a  thing  of  the  past.  Taxidermists  and  dealers 
in  birds'  eggs  generally  report  a  very  small  demand  for 
birds'  eggs  and  skins.  Many  of  the  students  are  now 
studying  the  lives  of  the  birds  and  following  them  with 
the  opera  glass,  instead  of  the  gun.  Nevertheless,  Mr.  T. 
L.  Burney  of  Lynn  says  that  the  kind  of  nature  study 
taught  in  many  schools  results  in  a  tendency  to  rob  birds' 
nests.  He  speaks  of  two  boys  being  arrested  for  robbing 
nests,  who  said  their  companions  were  doing  the  same  thing. 
He  also  said  he  met,  in  the  woods,  many  children  who  were 
interested  in  birds,  and  said  they  hoped  to  get  a  collection 
of  eggs.  Such  children  usually  do  not  know  that  this  kind 
of  nature  study  is  an  infraction  of  the  laws  of  the  Common- 
wealth, punishable  by  arrest  and  fine. 

Trolley  Roads,  Automobiles  and  Launches.  —  The  cheap 
transportation  from  city  to  country  offered  by  the  trolley 
roads  affords  hunters,  boys  and  foreigners  an  opportunity 
to  reach  distant  fields  and  woods,  and  so  spreads  the  baneful 
influences  of  the  city  over  a  much  wider  radius  than  ever 
before.  Foreigners  and  boys  swarm  into  the  country,  and 
practise  with  their  cheap  firearms  on  all  animated  nature, 
from  the  slow-moving  turtle  and  the  frog  to  the  farmer's 
fowls  or  cattle. 

While  the  poor  man  takes  the  trolley  car,  the  well-to-do  or 
rich  take  the  automobile.  The  automobilist,  with  the  long- 
range,  small-bore  rifle,  has  the  advantage  over  all  the  others 
in  killing  any  creature  that  can  be  shot  while  stationary. 
The  "auto,"  unlike  the  horse,  will  stand  quietly  for  the 
shooter.  Fanners  say  that  shooters  in  "  autos  "  are  killing 
everything  of  any  size  within  rifle  range  of  the  roads.  Mr. 
C.  E.  Bailey  says  that  he  believes  they  have  killed  most  of 
the  hawks  that  were  formerly  to  be  seen  sitting  on  dead 
trees  along  the  roads  of  the  country  over  which  he  travels. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  485 

The  gasoline  launch  is  a  potent  factor  in  the  killing  or 
driving  out  of  the  clucks  along  our  coasts  and  rivers.  It  is 
used  illegally  to  get  within  range  of  the  bay  ducks,  and  its 
constant  use  in  the  rivers  of  the  eastern  counties  frightens 
the  ducks  away  from  their  former  haunts. 

Telegraph,  Telephone  and  Trolley  Wires.  — The  wires  of 
telegraph,  telephone  and  trolley  companies  annually  cause 
the  death  of  hundreds  if  not  thousands  of  birds,  which  fly 
against  them  in  the  night  or  even  by  day.  I  have  had 
many  woodcock  brought  to  me  that  had  been  killed  in 
this  way.  Mr.  George  M.  Poland  of  Wakefield  says  that 
many  woodcock  and  rails  are  killed  thus.  Grouse  are  also 
killed  by  these  wires,  and  by  wire  fences  against  which  they 
fly ;  while  the  number  of  the  smaller  birds  that  are  killed 
by  trolley  wires  would  probably  be  astonishing  if  it  could 
be  known. 

^Lighthouses  and  electric  light  towers  destroy  thousands 
of  birds,  which  fly  against  them  during  nocturnal  migrations. 
Man  also  contributes  to  destroy  and  drive  away  birds  by 
\  introducing  creatures  which  molest  or  kill  them.     Such  are 
)  the  introduction  of  the  mongoose  into  Jamaica  and  other 
"N   islands,  and  the  importation  into  this  country  of  the  do- 
|  mestic  cat  and  dog,  the  English  sparrow,  the  house  rats 
/  and  mice,  and  possibly  that  of  the  starling  and  pheasant. 
yThese  will  be  considered  under  the  head  of  natural  enemies^ 
Cutting  off  Timber  and  Undergrowth. — The  greatly  in- 
creased demand  for  pine  lumber  brings  in  the  portable  saw- 
mill, one  of  the  chief  contributing  causes  to  the  diminution 
of  hawks,  owls,  grouse,  and  all  birds  which  breed,  or  seek 


cover,  in  a  heavy  pine  growth.  Mr.  Prentiss  says:  "A 
man  who  is  a  good  shot  can  now,  with  a  dog,  follow  and 
kill  nearly  every  bird  he  flushes ;  while  formerly  at  least  60 
per  cent  of  the  birds  flushed  in  a  day's  hunting  would  take 
to  the  heavy  growth  of  pine,  and  escape  at  least  for  that 
day."  Everywhere  I  go  in  eastern  Massachusetts  the  white 
pine  is  being  cut  off.  Thousands  of  acres  were  cut  in  the 
State  last  year.  The  demand  is  everywhere  increasing. 
The  great  storm  of  November,  1898,  uprooted  acres  of  large 
pine  timber  in  Plymouth  County.  Then  came  the  coal  strike 


48G  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

of  1902,  which  caused  the  cutting  of  many  acres  of  wood  of 
all  kinds.  This,  in  addition  to  the  regular  demand  for  pine 
timber,  has  caused  the  destruction,  says  Mr.  A.  C.  Dyke, 
of  many  of  the  favorite  nesting  trees  of  the  larger  hawks. 
Cutting  pine  timber  drives  out  birds  which,  like  the  black- 
throated  green  warbler,  nest  there.  Where  these  pines  are 
succeeded  by  hard-wood  trees,  other  birds  will  take  the 
places  of  those  driven  out ;  *  but  where,  as  in  the  suburbs 
of  cities,  these  trees  are  cut  and  the  ground  cleared  of  even 
shrubbery,  the  sparrows,  warblers,  towhees  and  thrushes 
are  driven  out,  as  well  as  the  wood  birds.  Lawns,  golf 
links,  country  club  grounds  and  grassy  parks  are  unsuitable 
for  the  birds  of  the  tangle,  and  they  will  not  live  in  such 
places.  The  work  of  destroying  the  irypsy  moth  is  now 
necessitating  much  tree  cutting  and  cleaning  up  of  shrubbery 
and  tangles.  This  is  bad  for  the  birds,  and  must  result  in 
reducing  the  numbers  of  some  ^peciesjn  the  region  infested 
by  the  moth. 

Mr.  C.  J.  Maynard,  in  his  recent  work,  "The  warblers 
of  New  England,"!  speaks  particularly  of  the  warblers 
having  been  driven  from  parks,  pleasure  grounds  and  the 
vicinity  of  cities  by  the  destruction  of  tb^  shrnhbp.ry. 
While  this  may  not  diminish  the  number  of  birds  in  the 
State,  it  tends  to  drive  the  birds  away  from  many  places 
where  they  might  be  retained  under  a  different  policy. 

The  draining  of  meadows  and  marshes  drives  out  the  birds 
that  frequent  these  places.  Thousands  of  acres  have  been 
drained  and  made  into  cranberry  bogs ;  many  swamps  have 
been  flowed  for  reservoirs ;  swamps  near  cities  are  drained 
and  filled.  The  extension^  of  cities,  the  building  of  summer 
cottages  along  the  coasts,  and  the  increase  of  population 
generally,  q.11_tgnr|  fn  rlrivft  put  tfofl  fojjrds  from  t.herr^hnsen 
haunts.  The  effect  of  these  repellent  agencies  is  to  reduce 
the  area  of  the  region  furnishing  a  food  supply  to  the  birds, 
and  so,  in  the  end,  to  decrease  in  the  aggregate  the  number 
of  birds. 

*  Prof.  J.  "W.  Votey  of  Burlington,  Vt.,  believes  that  the  growth  which  fol- 
lows the  cutting  off  of  the  spruce  furnishes  better  nesting  areas  for  the  birds  than 
those  they  formerly  had. 

t  Completed  Jan.  1,  1905. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  487 

The  Natural  Enemies  of  Birds. 

In  the  opinion  of  many  correspondents,  the  natural  ene- 
mies of  birds  do  no  appreciable  injury,  while  others  consider 
fEem  the  chief  cause  of  the  decrease  of  birds.     It  is  notice- 
able that  some  sportsmen  and  gunners  complain  particularly  ,~^^ 
of  hawks,  foxes,  crows,  skunks  and  weasels.     At  first  sight    J) 
it  might  seem  that  those  most  responsible  for  the  decrease  of/ 
birds  were  trying  to  shift  the  blame  ;  but  we  must  remember  \ 
that  those  who  are  most  in  the  woods  with  the  birds  are  / 

most  likely  to  observe  their   destruction    bv  their  natural  \ 

"  _J 

enemies. 

Under  normal  conditions,  the  natural  enemies  of  birds  are 
alsqlJifii*  friflnds7  There  is  no  better  proof  of  this  than  the 
statements  made  by  the  early  settlers  at  a  time  when  game 
birds  were  here  in  great  abundance.  Eagles  and  hawks  were 
then  far  more  numerous  than  they  are  now.  Evidently  they  . 
produced  no  appreciable  effect  on  the^numbers  of  game  birds. 

Hawks  which  feed  on  birds  will"  overtake  the  crippled, 
sickly,  least  active  or  most  conspicuous  birds.  This  results 
in  a  survival  of  the  wariest,  strongest,  most  active  and  least 
conspicuous  individuals,  — in  a  word,  the  fittest.  It  pre- 
vents the  spread  of  disease  and  the  propagation  of  weakness 
and  unfitness  ;  it  preserves  the  race.  This  is  true  to  a  much 
less  extent  of  the  effect  of  shooting,  for  a  charge  of  shot 
will  overtake  the  strongest  as  well  as  the  weakest,  —  the  fit 
as  Avell  as  the  unfit.  Hawks,  owls,  foxes  and  other  so-called 
enemies  of  birds  also  protect  birds  in  another  way.  The 
horned  owl,  no  doubt,  now  and  then  kills  a  grouse ;  but  it  also 
kills  the  skunk  and  crow,  which  destroy  the  grouse  eggs  or 
young.  Hawks  may  kill  game  birds  as  well  as  other  birds  ,• 
but  they  also  kill  squirrels,  crows,  jays  and  weasels,  the 
enemies  of  these  birds.  All  this  may  be  true  of  the  hunter 
also ;  but  hawks,  owls,  foxes  and  weasels  kill,  in  addition, 
field-mice,  deer-mice  and  shrews,  all  of  which  might  other- 
wise increase  unduly,  and  become  very  destructive  to  egg* 
and  young  birds.  No  one  knows  how  often  the  nests  of 
birds  are  broken  up  by  deer-mice.  They  climb  trees  like 
squirrels,  nest  in  hollow  trees,  and  may  be  as  great  a  dan- 


488  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

ger  to  birds  as  is  the  dormouse  of  Europe.  Shrews  are 
notorious  flesh-eaters,  and  possibly  may  be  very  destructive 
to  ground-nesting  birds ;  while  field-mice,  when  pushed 
for  food,  are  among  the  most  destructive  rodents  known. 
These  creatures  probably  feed  mainly  at  night ;  their  habits 
are  not  well  known.  They  can  be  held  in  check  by  natural 
means  only,  hence  we  must  beware  of  destroying  the  animals 
that  feed  on  them.  Acknowledging,  as  we  must,  that  under 
natural  conditions  the  natural  enemies  of  birds  are  useful, 
there  is  no  doubt  that  under  the  artificial  conditions  pro- 
duced by  man  some  of  the«i  may..  at_times  nee3^~St!ficial 
chock.  Under  natural  conditions,  the  crow  is  certainly  a 
valuable  force  in  nature ;  but  when  we  have  destroyed  the 
raccoons,  the  larger  hawks,  owls  and  eagles, — the  only 
creatures  besides  man,  perhaps,  which  serve  to  hold  the 
crow  in  check,  —  then  we  must  also  check  the  increase  of 
the  crow,  or,  wanting  sufficient  food,  it  will  become  very 
destructive  to  grain,  fruit,  fowls  and  smaller  birds.  In  like 
manner  we  have  destroyed  the  wolves,  which  formerly  kept 
the  fox  in  check;  we  must,  then,  check  the  fox,  lest  it,  in- 
creasing, attack  our  fowls  and  the  game  and  insectivorous 
birds.  For  this  reason,  it  is  well  that  the  fox  and  crow  are 
not  protected  by  law. 

Partly  because  of  the  fact  that  the  natural  enemies  of 
birds  may  sometimes  need  an  artificial  check,  and  partly  be- 
cause the  injury  done  by  them  is  often  much  magnified,  it 
seems  best  to  publish  some  evidence  of  their  comparative 
harmfulness,  under  the  conditions  now  prevailing  in  this 
Commonwealth. 

The  natural  enemies  of  birds,  noted  as  harmful  by  the 
observers  who  have  contributed  to  this  portion  of  the  report, 
may  be  arranged  in  the  following  order,  with  reference  to 
the  number  reporting  each  :  cats,  eighty-two  reports  ;  foxes, 
fifty-eight ;  crows,  fifty-four ;  English  sparrows,  thirty-nine  ; 
hawks,  thirty-four ;  jays,  twenty-six ;  owls,  twenty-two ; 
the  elements,  twenty-one  ;  *  weasels,  seventeen  ;  skunks,  six ; 
snakes,  three ;  pheasants,  three ;  minks,  three ;  orioles, 
three  ;  chipmunks,  two  ;  raccoons,  one. 

*  This  subject  was  quite  fully  treated  in  my  last  special  report,  and  will  not  be 
further  noticed  here. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  489 

Cats  and  Dogs.  —  The  destructiveness  of  the  cat  is  noted 
not  only  by  the  greatest  number  of  observers,  but,  with  re- 
markable unanimity,  nearly  all  who  report  on  the  natural 
enemies  of  birds  place  the  cat  first  among  destructive  animals. 
The  domestic  cat,  then,  introduced,  fed,  pampered  and  petted 
by  man,  leads  the  list,  and  sometimes  leads  even  the  sports- 
man in  number  of  birds  killed  per  day.  Mr.  Brewster  tells 
ola  day's  hunt  by  four  sportsmen  with  their  dogs,  in  which 
they  killed  but  one  game  bird,  a  bob- white.  On  their  return 
at  night  to  the  farmhouse  where  they  were  staying,  they 
found  that  the  old  cat  had  beaten  their  score,  having  brought 
in,  during  the  day,  two  bob- whites  and  one  grouse.  Reports 
of  the  cat's  destructiveness  come  from  every  county  in  the 
State.  Cats  in  good  hunting  grounds  will  average  at  least 
fifty  birds  each  per  year.  I  have  recorded  heretofore  the 
destruction  of  all  the  young  birds  in  six  nests  and  two  of  the 
parent  birds  by  one  cat  in  a  day.  Cats  kill  for  the  sake  of 
killing,  and  destroy  more  birds  than  they  can  eat.  They 
take  a  savage  pleasure  in  playing  with  their  prey,  and  tortur- 
ing it  in  the  most  cruel  manner.  Cats  are  also  more  destruc- 
tive than  other  animals,  because  so  much  more  abundant. 
A  friend  who  was  raising  pheasants  was  obliged  to  kill  over 
two  hundred  cats  in  a  few  years.  Game  birds  suffer  much 
from  the  cat,  but  the  smaller  birds  suffer  more.  Cats  are  far 
more  destructive  to  birds  than  the  fox,  for  they  climb  trees 
and  take  the  young  out  of  the  nests.  They  easily  catch 
young  birds  which  are  just  learning  to  fly.  They  frequently 
catch  the  adult  birds  upon  the  ground  when  they  are  feeding, 
or  when  they  are  drinking  or  bathing.  The  most  harmful 
characteristic  of  the  cat  is  its  tendency  to  "revert  to  a  wild 
state.  If  a  dog  loses  its  master  and  cannot  find  its  home,  it 
seeks  to  form  the  acquaintance  of  a  new  master ;  but  the  cat 
is  quite  as  likely  to  take  to  the  woods  and  run  wild.  It 
then  becomes  a  terror  to  all  living  things  Avhich  it  can  master. 
Whoever  turns  out  or  abandons  a  cat  or  a  kitten  in  the 
country  has  much  to  ansAver  for.  Proofs  of  the  destructive- 
ness  of  cats  are  not  wanting.  They  were  introduced  on 
Sable  Island,  off  the  coast  of  Nova  Scotia,  about  1880. 
They  ran  wild,  and,  multiplying  rapidly,  exterminated  the 
rabbits  which  had  been  in  possession  of  the  island  for  half  a 


490  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

century.*  On  Aldabra  Island,  about  two  hundred  miles 
north-west  of  Madagascar,  cats  are  common.  They  have 
decimated  the  birds,  having  exterminated  a  flightless  rail,  an 
interesting  bird  peculiar  to  this  group  of  islands.  Cats  are 
also  numerous  on  Glorioso  Island,  and,  as  a  consequence,  the 
birds  on  this  island  are  even  less  common  than  on  Aldabra. f 

Dogs  destroy  comparatively  few  birds,  but  some  dogs  will 
eat  every  egg  they  can  find.  Some  dogs  catch  and  kill 
young  and  even  adult  game  birds.  Dogs,  like  cats,  kill  other 
animals  for  sport.  They  are  not  nearly  so  expert  at  catching 
birds  as  cats,  but  they  chase  and  molest  birds  even  where 
they  cannot  catch  them. 

TJie  Red  Fox.  —  Fifty-eight  people  regard  the  fox  as 
one  of  the  most  injurious  enemies  of  birds,  thus  placing  it 
next  to  the  cat  in  destructiveness.  This  is  entirely  at  vari- 
ance with  my  experience.  I  have  followed  the  tracks  of 
foxes  for  many  weary  miles  through  the  snow  about  Ware- 
ham,  where  they  seem  to  live,  in  winter  at  least,  on  mice, 
marine  animals,  an  occasional  muskrat,  and  such  bones  and 
dead  marine  and  other  animals  as  they  can  pick  up  ;  but 
I  have  never  seen  any  conclusive  evidence  there  that  a  fox 
had  killed  a  bird.  My  son  dug  out  a  fox's  burrow,  but 
there  was  no  sign  that  any  live  bird  had  been  taken  there. 
Foxes  pick  up  all  sorts  of  meat  scraps,  chicken  legs,  heads, 
etc.,  and  kill  some  birds,  as  well  as  poultry;  but,  accord- 
ing to  my  experience,  this  is  the  exception  and  not  the  rule. 
Mr.  William  Brewster,  who  has  been  in  the  woods  more 
than  most  gunners  or  sportsmen,  tells  me  that  he  has  seen 
very  little  positive  evidence  of  the  destruction  of  birds  by 
foxes,  although  occasionally  they  kill  game  birds.  Mr. 
William  S.  Perry  of  Worcester  says  that  foxes  kill  practi- 
cally no  birds.  He  has  shot  a  great  many  foxes  and  exam- 
ined their  stomach  contents,  as  well  as  those  of  foxes  killed 
by  others,  and  says  he  has  never  found  the  remains  of  a 
bird  in  a  fox's  stomach.  At  a  recent  meeting  of  the  Massa- 
chusetts Fish  and  Game  Protective  Association,  Mr.  A.  B. 

*  "The  danger  of  introducing  noxious  animals  and  birds,"  Dr.  T.  S.  Palmer, 
Year  Book  of  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture  for  1898,  pp.  89, 
90. 

t  Proc.  U.  S.  National  Museum,  XVI.,  18&4,  pp.  762,  764. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  491 

F.  Kinney  stated  that  he  had  examined  the  stomachs  of 
eighty-five  foxes,  and  found  only  two  quail,  one  woodcock 
and  one  partridge.  Mice,  frogs,  rabbits,  berries  and  frozen 
apples  were  among  the  food  material  found.  Mr.  H.  W. 
Tinkham  of  Touisset  says  that  in  his  hunts  this  year  he  has 
observed  only  one  case  where  a  bird  had  been  killed  by  a 
fox  ;  the  bird  was  a  crow.  Of  thirteen  fox  stomachs  he 
examined,  only  two  showed  any  remains  of  birds ;  and  out 
of  ninety  fox  excrements,  only  one  showed  birds'  remains. 
The  food  evidently  consisted  mainly  of  mice  and  other  small 
mammals.* 

This,  however,  is  only  negative  evidence.  There  is  con- 
vincing, positive  evidence  of  the  destructiveness  of  the  fox 
to  offer.  Mr.  C.  L.  Perkins  of  Newburyport  writes : 
"  Have  made  it  a  practice,  when  skinning  foxes,  to  open 
the  stomach,  and  have  found,  in  seasons  of  bare  ground, 
moles,  field-mice,  etc.  ;  but  when  the  earth  is  covered  with 
snow,  the  stomach  will  generally  contain  remains  of  grouse 
or  rabbits.  This  is  no  doubt  due  to  the  habit  of  the  grouse 
to  bury  in  the  snow."  Mr.  F.  B.  McKechnie  of  Ponkapog 
tells  the  following :  "In  May  and  June  of  the  present  year 
I  was  at  a  loss  to  account  for  the  destruction  of  numbers  of 
birds'  nests  found  by  a  friend  and  myself  about  Ponkapog. 
Catbirds,  song  sparrows,  thrashers,  black-billed  cuckoos, 
ovenbirds,  redstarts  and  other  nests  were  robbed  of  their 
contents  with  astonishing  rapidity.  Red  squirrels  and  snakes 
were  very  scarce  in  the  pasture  where  these  nests  were  found, 
and  after  some  discussion  we  laid  the  destruction  to  foxes. 
It  is  well  known  that  foxes  will  follow  a  man's  track ;  but 
it  was  not  for  some  time  that  we  found  out  that  they  were 
deliberately  following  us,  and  taking  the  eggs  and  young 
of  all  the  nests,  either  on  or  near  the  ground,  which  we 
had  stopped  to  examine.  In  the  first  part  of  June  we  got 
the  first  clew,  when  a  young  fox,  following  Mr.  Horton, 
walked  to  within  a  few  yards  of  him  in  a  swamp  where 
he  had  stopped  to  watch  a  Canada  warbler.  In  the  morn- 

*  The  inadequacy  of  an  examination  of  stomach  contents  alone  to  determine 
the  character  of  an  animal's  food  is  seen,  when  we  consider  that  we  get,  in  this 
way,  evidence  of  only  one  meal  out  of  all  that  the  animal  has  eaten  during  its 
lifetime. 


492  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.    [Pub  Doc. 

ing  of  June  19  Mr.  Horton  again  saw  two  foxes,  nearly  full- 
grown,  skulking  along  behind  him.  He  directed  me  to  a 
song  sparrow's  nest  with  six  eggs  which  he  had  found  and 
photographed  during  the  morning,  but  before  I  got  there 
the  eggs  were  taken.  In  fact,  as  many  as  twelve  nests  were 
robbed  before  we  discovered  the  cause." 

Mr.  I.  Chester  Horton  corroborates  this.  He  writes : 
"  I  have  spent  some  time  the  last  two  years  in  photograph- 
ing birds'  nests  on,  or  near,  the  ground,  and  was  sorry  to 
find  in  1904  that  nearly  all  the  nests  I  visited  were  robbed 
and  destroyed.  One  song  sparrow's  nest  was  robbed  a  few 
hours  after  I  visited  it,  apparently  by  some  animal  that  had 
followed  my  track.  One  morning,  while  watching  a  bird, 
I  concealed  myself  in  the  branches  of  a  small  pine  tree. 
While  watching  there  I  heard  a  fox  bark,  and  soon  found 
he  was  coming  in  my  direction.  In  a  few  minutes  two 
foxes  appeared,  following  my  track,  and  came  within  fifty 
feet  of  where  I  stood,  stopped  as  though  they  partly  de- 
tected my  presence,  and,  after  playing  a  few  minutes,  made 
off  into  the  woods.  On  another  occasion  a  half-grown  fox, 
following  my  track,  came  within  fifteen  feet  of  where  I 
stood,  perfectly  motionless,  in  a  swamp.  I  have  no  doubt 
that  foxes  discovered  that  I  was  seeking  birds'  nests,  and 
followed  me  and  robbed  the  nests  I  found.  While  photo- 
graphing nests  I  found  three  ovenbirds'  nests,  within  a 
radius  of  a  few  hundred  feet,  one  being  partly  built,  the 
other  two  with  freshly  laid  eggs.  I  waited  several  days 
and  visited  them  again.  I  should  have  stated  that  one  of 
these  nests  was  about  five  feet  from  a  path,  and,  knowing 
that  something  was  following  me  and  destroying  nests,  I 
did  not  move  out  of  the  path  in  visiting  this  nest.  The  nest 
that  I  found  partly  built  I  photographed  after  it  had  eggs, 
as  it  was  rather  peculiar,  being  constructed  entirely  of,  and 
lined  with,  pine  needles.  I  also  intended  to  photograph 
the  third  nest,  with  the  bird  on  it,  as  she  was  very  tame  ; 
but  on  my  third  visit  it  had  been  robbed,  as  was  the  one  I 
photographed.  I  visited  the  one  by  the  path  several  times, 
but  never  stepped  out  of  the  path,  and  did  not  photograph  it, 
and  was  gratified  to  see  the  eggs  hatch  out  and  the  young 


.,    o 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  493 

grow  to  be  large  enough  to  leave  the  nest.  One  nest  I 
found,  that  of  a  brown  thrush,  two  feet  high  in  a  blueberry 
bush,  was  robbed  when  it  had  young  half  grown." 

If  foxes  follow  the  tracks  of  people  who  find  birds'  nests, 
then  bird  study  and  photography  may  prove  dangerous  to 
the  birds. 

Mr.  C.  E.  Ingalls  once  intimated  to  me  that  he  had  some 
reason  to  believe  that  a  fox  had  followed  his  tracks  to  a 
bird's  nest.  In  response  to  a  written  inquiry  he  sends  the 
following:  "I  had  at  one  tune  under  observation  the  nest 
of  a  meadowlark.  One  afternoon  about  sundown  I  passed 
the  nest  with  its  full  complement  of  young  a  day  or  two 
old,  with  everything  looking  favorable  for  a  successful  de- 
velopment. I  passed  from  the  meadow  where  the  nest  was 
situated  up  to  a  hillside  adjoining,  and  in  full  view  of  the 
location  of  the  nest.  I  seated  myself  upon  the  ground  to 
watch  some  spotted  sandpipers  that  I  felt  sure  were  nesting 
beside  the  brook  flowing  through  the  meadow,  when  I  saw 
a  fox  come  to  the  lower  end  of  the  meadow  and  begin  to 
hunt,  as  I  supposed,  for  mice.  In  the  course  of  his  quar- 
tering over  the  ground  he  apparently  stumbled  onto  my 
lark's  nest,  and,  as  he  became  aware  of  its  proximity,  he 
pounced  sharply  to  one  side  right  into  it.  I  jumped  to  my 
feet  and  shouted  to  him,  and  ran  towards  the  nest,  while 
Mr.  Fox  loped  airily  and  quickly  to  the  woods.  When  I 
arrived  on  the  scene,  two  of  the  young  were  gone  and  one 
other  lay  about  a  foot  from  the  nest,  dead.  One  pleasant 
evening  in  May  I  was  sitting  on  a  log  near  the  edge  of  a 
piece  of  mowing  land,  where  it  joined  some  scrub  on  the 
edge  of  a  wood.  .  .  .  While  waiting,  I  saw  a  fox  on  the 
edge  of  the  grass  land  mincing  along,  in  no  hurry,  and  evi- 
dently hunting  for  mice  or  grasshoppers,  as  he  would  thrust 
his  muzzle  into  the  grass,  then  dance  around  as  if  watching 
some  moving  object  in  the  grass,  make  a  grab,  then  move 
along,  all  the  time  coming  nearer  to  my  position,  which 
was  hidden  from  him  so  long  as  I  remained  motionless. 
Suddenly,  when  the  fox  was  within  five  or  six  rods  of  me, 
a  big  ball  of  feathers  flew  oat  of  the  scrub  at  him  and  drove 
him  some  distance  into  the  grass  land.  I  immediately  sized 


494  BOAKD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

the  situation  up.  A  partridge  (ruffed  grouse)  was  warning 
Mr.  Fox  that  she  had  claims  to  that  particular  tract  of  land 
that  he  would  be  required  to  respect.  But  Mr.  Fox  was 
evidently  hungry,  so  he  followed  the  brave  little  mother 
back  to  her  nest  beside  a  stump  on  the  edge  of  the  scrub. 
Although  the  bird  made  one  or  more  rushes,  they  were  of 
no  avail,  and,  although  I  did  not  at  first  intend  to  harm  the 
fox.  as  at  that  time  of  year  he  would  be  of  no  use  to  me 
dead,  I  regarded  it,  in  the  light  of  recent  developments,  to 
be  a  case  for  armed  intervention,  so  I  put  a  bullet  where  it 
would  do  the  most  good,  and  he  died  within  his  length  of 
the  nest,  with  his  mouth  and  throat  filled  with  egg  con- 
tents." 

Probably  foxes  kill  some  of  the  young  of  the  smaller  birds 
when  they  are  learning  to  fly,  catching  them  as  cats  do.  Of 
this  habit  Mr.  F.  H.  Mosher  says:  "I  have  seen  but  one 
instance  of  the  fox  catching  a  bird,  and  that  was  several 
years  ago.  I  was  standing  on  a  rise  of  ground  that  over- 
looked a  wet  meadow.  A  fox  came  out  of  the  woods  and 
appeared  to  be  hunting  for  mice  in  the  grass.  As  he  came 
opposite  a  small  clump  of  bushes,  a  small  bird  flew  out  and 
started  for  the  woods.  The  fox  ran  a  few  steps  after  it  and 
gave  a  tremendous  spring,  and  caught  it  on  the  wing.  Prob- 
ably it  was  a  young  bird." 

If  foxes  quarter  over  the  ground  in  summer,  as  they  cer- 
tainly do  in  winter,  it  would  seem  impossible  for  any  nest 
on  the  ground  to  escape  their  notice,  unless,  indeed,  they 
are  unable  to  smell  the  sitting  bird.  Prof.  C.  F.  Hodge 
told  me  in  1903  that  he  had  found  by  experiment  that  trained 
pointer  and  setter  dogs  were  unable  to  find  a  ruffed  grouse 
sitting  on  her  nest,  even  when,  in  one  case,  the  bird  had  left 
her  nest  and  walked  about  a  short  time  previously.  This 
seems  to  indicate  that  these  birds  leave  no  scent  during  in- 
cubation ;  but  Mr.  Brewster  informs  me  that  his  dog  on 
more  than  one  occasion  found  a  woodcock  on  her  nest.  It 
seems  probable,  however,  that  ordinarily  dogs  and  foxes  find 
only  such  nests  as  they  happen  to  stumble  upon  ;  otherwise, 
what  is  to  prevent  them  from  destroying  the  broods  of  nearly 
all  ground-breeding  birds  ? 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  495 

In  order  to  determine  the  value  of  the  evidence  against 
the  natural  enemies  of  birds,  letters  were  written  to  nearly 
all  who  regarded  crows,  jays,  foxes,  squirrels  and  weasels  as 
particularly  injurious,  inquiring  what  evidence  had  led  to 
this  conclusion.  Some  of  the  replies  showed  that  the  evi- 
dence was  merely  hearsay,  others  appeared  to  be  the  result 
of  personal  observation. 

Regarding  foxes,  Mr.  J.  H.  Wood  of  Pittsfield  writes  as 
follows  :  "I  visited  a  swamp  in  the  vicinity  of  Ashley  Lake, 
for  the  purpose  of  running  the  white  rabbits  with  a  hound. 
There  had  been  a  heavy  snowfall  a  day  or  two  before,  and  in 
following  a  bank  on  the  edge  of  the  swamp  we  noticed 
several  holes  in  the  snow  at  the  foot  of  the  bank  under  some 
spruce  trees.  We  also  noticed  a  fox  track  and  some  feathers 
about  a  hole.  This  led  me  to  investigate,  and  I  found  that 
this  one  fox  had  killed  four  out  of  the  seven  partridge  that 
had  taken  refuge  in  the  snow  from  the  storm  of  the  previous 
day.  We  tracked  this  fox  from  where  he  had  eaten  the  first 
bird  to  a  ledge,  where  we  succeeded  in  finding  one  of  the 
birds  that  had  been  earned  there  by  the  fox.  My  next  ex- 
perience was  in  1902,  about  the  20th  of  November,  when  I 
found  a  place  where  some  men  were  getting  out  stone. 
They  had  uncovered  a  fox's  burrow  where  there  had  been  a 
litter  of  foxes  the  past  summer,  and  if  you  could  have  seen 
the  parts  and  feathers  of  the  partridge  you  would  have  been 
surprised." 

Mr.  W.  J.  Cross  of  Becket,  also  in  Berkshire  County,  a 
fox  hunter  himself,  says :  ' '  Every  hunter  of  the  fox  has 
found,  when  following  a  track,  the  circle  of  feathers  telling 
the  story  of  where  the  ruffed  grouse  made  his  last  dive 
under  the  snow  to  furnish  a  meal  for  Mr.  Fox  the  next 
morning." 

Mr.  W.  H.  Snow  of  Becket  says:  "I  have  seen  where 
the  foxes  have  killed  and  eaten  the  partridges  when  there  is 
a  snowstorm.  The  partridges  get  under  spruce  trees  to  get 
shelter  for  the  night,  and  they  are  caught  by  the  foxes." 

Mr.  Thomas  Allen  of  Bernardston,  Franklin  County,  as- 
serts that  he  has  found  the  remains  of  grouse  partly  eaten, 
or  feathers  alone  remaining,  where  fox  tracks  showed 


496  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

plainly.  Others  have  related  to  him  similar  experiences. 
One  saw  a  fox  eating  a  grouse. 

Mr.  George  E.  TVhitehead  of  Millbtfry,  Worcester  County, 
says  :  * '  Every  observing  hunter  or  trapper  can  tell  you  the 
story  of  the  fox's  attempt  to  ambush  a  partridge,  as  told  by 
the  tracks  on  the  snow.  One  can  plainly  see  how  the  fox 
took  advantage  of  every  bit  of  natural  cover,  while  he 
sneaked  to  where  he  made  his  spring.  The  fact  that  a  few 
feathers  are  left  shows  that  he  met  with  success." 

Mr.  Otis  Thayer  of  AVest  Quincy,  Norfolk  County,  sajrs 
that  after  the  Blue  Hills  Reservation  was  closed  to  hunters, 
game  increased  very  rapidly,  for  foxes  were  scarce  ;  but  as 
the  foxes  increased,  game  decreased.  Formerly,  he  says, 
this  region  was  good  hunting  ground ;  now  he  finds  no 
game,  but  always  finds  foxes.  They  are  now  so  plentiful 
that  they  are  becoming  destructive  to  poultry  as  the  game 
decreases. 

Mr.  "W.  H.  Aspinwall,  secretary  of  the  Massachusetts 
Rod  and  Gun  Club,  writes  as  follows:  "During  the  last 
few  years  I  have  twice,  if  I  remember  aright,  found  the 
place  where  a  fox  had  very  recently  killed  a  partridge  and 
eaten  him.  It  was  so  recent  an  act  that  my  setter  pointed 
at  the  place,  and  I  went  up  and  found  the  remains  of  the 
partridge,  and  foxes'  tracks  all  around.  The  only  fox  that  I 
ever  shot  I  ran  on  quite  unexpectedly  while  working  up  a 
bevy  of  quail.  It  was  a  young  dog  fox,  and  he  was  on  the 
same  errand  that  I  was,  for  the  quail  flushed  when  I  killed 
the  fox.  I  have  made  a  great  many  inquiries  among  the 
native  hunters  in  our  country  districts,  and  they  all  believe 
that  foxes  and  skunks,  especially  in  the  breeding  season, 
are  very  destructive  to  our  game  birds.  I  have  been  told 
by  a  number  that  in  digging  out  foxes  that  have  holed  they 
have  found  the  remains  of  partridges,  and  even  of  the 
smaller  birds,  such  as  robins,  etc.  Only  last  week  a  friend 
of  mine  who  is  an  extremely  good  observer  and  sportsman 
told  me  that  he  found  the  remains  of  a  robin  which  a  fox 
had  just  killed.  I  believe  that  the  chief  difficulty  is  in  the 
breeding  season,  when  it  is  quite  easy  for  foxes  to  catch  the 
hen  bird  on  a  nest.  I  think  that  most  people  agree  that,  as 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  497 

the  foxes  have  increased  tremendously  in  numbers  in  the 
neighborhood  of  our  reservations,  such  as  the  Blue  Hills 
Reservation,  the  partridges  have  decreased  in  about  the 
same  proportion.  That  foxes  have  increased  in  eastern 
Massachusetts  is  proved  by  the  evidence  that  within  the  last 
few  years  a  great  deal  of  poultry  has  been  destroyed,  even 
in  such  a  closely  populated  district  as  Chestnut  Hill ;  and 
foxes  have  been  seen  quite  frequently.  I  believe  that  the 
State  should  in  some  way  make  a  decided  stand  in  destroy- 
ing the  vermin  in  the  reservations,  if  they  desire  to  make 
this  a  favorite  breeding  ground  for  the  birds."  Consider- 
able further  evidence  of  this  same  character  was  received. 
There  is  at  least  one  reservation  where  foxes  are  not  pro- 
tected. Mr.  Charles  P.  Price,  superintendent  of  the  Mid- 
dlesex Fells  Reservation,  tells  me  that  the  foxes  have  been 
all  killed  or  driven  out  of  the  reservation,  and  that  game 
birds  have  increased  there.  About  fifteen  foxes  per  year 
were  killed  for  three  years. 

Mr.  Henry  B.  Bigelow  of  Cohasset  says:  "Foxes  are 
particularly  destructive  to  quail  and  partridges  in  this  neigh- 
borhood ;  the  entrance  to  every  fox  hole  is  strewn  with  their 
feathers  ;  and  to  my  certain  knowledge  one  fox,  in  1899, 
killed,  during  the  autumn,  six  out  of  a  covey  of  twelve  to 
fourteen  quail.  Partridges  also  suffer,  as  shown  by  the 
presence  of  their  feathers  about  the  dens,  as  do  also  domes- 
tic fowls." 

Mr.  S.  J.  Harris  of  East  Dedham  writes:  "I  once  shot 
at  a  fox  having  a  partridge  in  his  mouth.  I  did  not  know 
that  it  was  a  partridge  when  I  fired  at  the  fox,  but  he 
dropped  it  when  I  fired,  and  of  course  I  got  the  par- 
tridge." 

The  limits  of  this  report  will  not  permit  the  printing  of 
half  the  evidence  received  against  the  fox.  Some  evidence 
from  other  parts  of  the  State  is  given  in  brief  below.  "  A 
common  occurrence  to  find  where  foxes  have  caught  and 
eaten  partridges,  both  on  snow  and  bare  ground."  (Her- 
bert A.  Bent,  Franklin,  Norfolk  County.)  "Have  never 
yet  seen  a  section  of  country  where  foxes  and  partridges 
were  plentiful  at  the  same  time."  (H.  R.  Packard,  Attle- 


498  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

borough,  Bristol  County.)  "Have  seen  feathers  of  birds 
around  his  burrow.  Where  the  fox  lives,  the  game  disap- 
pears." (A.  C.  Southworth,  Lakeville,  Plymouth  County.) 

This  evidence,  like  the  rest,  is  largely  circumstantial ; 
but  it  seems  sufficient  to  prejudice  the  case  of  the  fox, 
somewhat,  and  leads  to  the  belief  that  in  some  localities  we 
may  have  too  many  foxes.  The  fox  is  well  able  to  take 
care  of  itself.  Its  natural  enemies  have  been  nearly  all 
extirpated,  and  it  must  be  kept  within  bounds,  or  it  may 
become  a  pest.  Under  ordinary  conditions,  however,  there 
are  fox  hunters  enough  to  hold  the  fox  in  check. 

Tlie  Common  Crow.  —  The__  crow  is  now  regarded  by  so 
marrvjagfljlle  as  a  useful  and  miHi  malign tifl  foird)  TfiTfTi  it_ 
may  not  be  out  of  place  to  present  here  some  of  the  evi- 
dence against  it.  I  have  already  given  to  this  Board  some 
of  my  experience  with  the  crow,  concerning  its  destructive- 
ness  to  birds,*  and  will  only  say  here  that  I  have  repeat- 
edly observed  crows  in  the  act  of  destroying  the  eggs  and 
young  of  other  birds  ;  they  are  so  addicted  to  nest-robbing 
that  it  is  a  wonder  that  any  young  of  the  smaller  birds  can 
be  reared  where  crows  are  numerous,  and  my  experience 
indicates  that  in  some  cases  very  few  are  actually  reared  in 
such  localities.  Since,  in  view  of  my  own  experience,  I 
may  be  considered  as  prejudiced  against  the  bird,  I  will 
quote  mainly  from  new  evidence  secured  in  this  inquiry. 
It  will  be  impossible  to  present  here  more  than  a  small  part 
of  the  evidence  received,  giving  it  in  the  words  of  the  wit- 
nesses, to  avoid  any  possible  distortion. 

In  a  letter  written  by  Mr.  Ingalls,  in  1896,  he  says  :  "I 
have  seen  the  nests  of  many  birds  of  several  species,  from 
the  ruffed  grouse  to  the  red-eye  and  chippy,  robbed  before 
my  own  eyes,  and  have  evidence  of  many  more.  Every 
season,  late  in  May  or  early  in  June,  the  crows  make  a  raid 
on  the  birds  nesting  in  the  shade  trees  along  our  village 
streets  and  in  orchards  and  private  grounds,  systematically 
searching  every  tree,  destroying  nests,  and  eating  or  carry- 
ing away  the  eggs  and  young."  Now,  after  eight  years 

*  Report  Massachusetts  State  Board  of  Agriculture,   1896,   "The  crow  in 
Massachusetts,"  p.  285;  see  also  ibid.,  1902,  p.  147. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF  BIRDS.  499 

more  experience,  he  rates  the  crow  as  the  most  destructive 
of  all  the  natural  enemies  of  birds. 

Here  is  another  experience  from  another  county  :  ' '  For 
the  past  ten  years,  during  the  breeding  season  of  the  birds, 
from  the  last  of  May  through  June  and  July  of  each  year, 
I  have  watched  the  crows  eat  the  eggs  and  little  birds.  I 
have  watched  them  start  at  4  o'clock  in  the  morning,  or  a 
little  later,  and  hunt  over  the  shade  trees  that  line  the 
streets  for  the  eggs  and  young  birds,  even  going  into  the 
trees  that  stand  close  to  the  buildings,  where  people  would 
not  think  a  crow  would  ever  go.  This  is  done,  of  course, 
before  people  rise  ;  and  as  soon  as  any  one  stirs  out  they 
will  leave,  but  will  begin  the  next  morning  just  the  same. 
Any  one  can  plainly  see  what  they  are  up  to.  After  the 
breeding  season  they  will  not  visit  the  shade  trees  until  the 
breeding  season  begins  the  next  year,  and  then  they  are 
ready  to  follow  them  up  again."  (Anson  O.  Howard,  East 
Northfield,  Franklin  County.) 

"  I  have  many  times  seen  crows  eating  robins'  eggs,  and 
have  also  seen  them  flying  from  nests  with  the  young  birds 
in  their  beaks.  This  was  probably  food  for  their  own 
young.  I  often  see  them  very  early  in  the  morning, 
searching  trees  near  houses  where  small  birds  have  nests." 
(Samuel  S.  Symmes,  Winchester,  Middlesex  County.) 

' '  I  have  seen  crows  come  to  the  eaves  of  a  house  and 
take  young  robins  from  the  nest."  (S.  F.  Stockwell,  Au- 
burn, Worcester  County.) 

"  Crows  are  remarkably  plentiful  here.  Have  not  known 
a  nest  of  young  birds  to  mature  this  year.  Saw  a  crow 
take  3'oung  out  of  nests  right  by  the  house."  (W.  J. 
Hunter,  Lincoln,  Middlesex  County.) 

"I  have  seen  crows  drive  birds  from  the  nest,  and  take 
and  eat  whatever  was  in  it,  whether  young  birds  or  eggs. 
There  is  one  tall  elm  tree  in  particular  on  the  boundaries  of 
our  place  where  I  have  watched  them  repeatedly  attack  the 
birds  and  eat  the  young."  (Amelia  M.  Brastow,  Wrentham, 
Norfolk  County.) 

"The  crows  visit  the  orchard  very  early  in  the  morning, 
usually  about  sunrise,  and  after  their  visit  you  can  find 


500  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

many  nests  without  eggs,  that  had  a  full  complement  the 
day  before."  (I.  Chester  Horton,  Poukapog,  Canton,  Nor- 
folk County.) 

"Directly  back  of  my  house  is  a  bush  pasture,  in  which 
are  a  few  pines,  cedars  and  birches.  In  the  pines  and 
cedars  numerous  robins  build  every  spring ;  and  every 
spring  about  the  nesting  time  of  the  crows  I  see  them 
searching  through  these  pines  and  cedars  for  —  something. 
At  no  other  time  of  year  do  I  ever  see  a  crow  even  alight 
in  this  pasture,  to  say  nothing  about  visiting  each  tree  sepa- 
rately, with  every  action  indicating  a  search  for  something. 
One  morning  a  few  years  ago  I  saw  a  crow  drop  into  the 
top  of  a  certain  cedar  in  this  pasture,  and  pick  the  eggs, 
one  by  one,  from  a  robin's  nest  there  and  eat  them.  A 
year  or  so  later  I  saw  the  same  thing  done  again,  although 
this  nest  was  in  another  cedar.  At  another  time  I  saw  a 
crow  visit  a  robin's  nest  in  an  oak  tree.  This  nest  con- 
tained young  birds  perhaps  a  week  old,  and  despite  the 
protests  of  the  parent  birds,  they  were  all  carried  away, 
apparently  to  feed  the  crow's  young.  In  a  clump  of  pines 
south-west  of  the  house  a  pair  of  crows  had  a  nest  one  year, 
while  the  crows'  hunting  ground  was  to  the  east  of  the 
house,  so  that  the  old  crows  often  flew  over  the  house  while 
passing  from  the  hunting  ground  to  the  nest.  On  one  of 
these  trips  a  crow  had  in  its  bill  a  young  bird,  unfeathered, 
which  I  identified  at  the  time  as  a  young  robin.  While 
there  are  many  nests  built  every  year  in  the  pasture  re- 
ferred to,  I  estimate  that  not  one  in  ten  ever  contains 
young,  and  not  half  the  young  ever  leave  the  nest  alive.  I 
know  that  at  least  one  crow  visited  this  pasture  every  day." 
(R.  H.  Carr,  Brockton,  Plymouth  County.) 

"Crows- destroy  many  nests  of  eggs.  Think  them  the 
worst  enemy."  (R.  H.  Cushinan,  Bernardston,  Franklin 
County.) 

"I  have  seen  crows  attack  the  nests  of  our  common  birds 
many  times,  and  carry  off  the  young  birds  to  be  used  for 
feeding  their  own  young  during  the  nesting  season.  .  .  . 
Both  crows  and  red  squirrels  are  fond  of  birds'  eggs,  and  I 
have  found  the  empty  shells  of  eggs  of  birds  near  their  nests 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  501 

many  times."  (Henry  N.  Smith,  South  Sudbury,  Middlesex 
County.) 

"I  have  many  times  seen  crows  in  the  act  of  robbing 

v  O 

birds'  nests."  (Fred  H.  Kennard,  Brookline,  Norfolk 
County. ) 

"I,  and  an  absolutely  trustworthy  friend,  have  on  several 
occasions  seen  crows  carrying  young  birds  away,  though  we 
have  been  unable  to  identify  the  victims.  Last  June  a  robin's 
nest  near  my  house  was  despoiled  by  crows,  and  three  young 
birds  were  taken  ;  the  fourth  fell  to  the  ground."  (Emily 
B.  Adams,  Springfield,  Hampden  County.) 

"This  bird  does  more  damage  to  the  farmer  than  almost 
all  other  birds.  He  deliberately  kills  our  young  song  birds, 
our  insect-eating  birds.  He  has  been  seen  to  go  through 
our  grove  of  maple  trees,  each  side  of  the  highway,  destroy- 
ing the  nests  and  young  birds.  Our  village  is  well  provided 
with  shade  trees,  and  nearly  every  tree  is  occupied  by  one 
or  more  birds'  nests,  mostly  robins,  with  many  smaller  birds  ; 
and  in  the  woods  outside  we  always  have  plenty  of  crows. 
In  the  nesting  season,  early  in  the  morning,  from  half-past 
3  to  5,  you  will  find  plenty  of  crows  hunting  the  trees  for 
nests,  and  it  is  always  a  still  hunt.  I  make  it  a  point  to 
look  after  them  at  this  season,  and  have  shot  quite  a  number 
of  them  with  both  eggs  and  young  birds  in  their  possession. 
One  morning  I  shot  one  from  my  door  with  a  young  robin, 
two-thirds  grown,  in  his  bill.  There  are  two  or  three  others 
here  that  I  have  interested  in  protecting  the  birds,  so  that 
we  manage  to  have  some  of  them,  and  make  it  rather  hot 
for  the  crows."  ("VT.  J.  Cross,  Becket,  Berkshire  County.) 

"The  crows  gather  in  quantities  about  the  maple  trees 
lining  the  highway,  and  fight  our  robins,  often  destroying 
the  old  bird,  and  then  destroying  the  eggs  or  young ;  also 
the  chipping  sparrow.  Then,  again,  they  attack  our  red- 
winged  blackbirds'  nests.  The  crow  is  well  aware  who  has 
the  gun,  and  makes  his  visits  early,  about  3.30  A.M.,  as  soon 
as  signs  of  life  appear.  He  is  out  when  no  gun  is  at  hand. 
This  is  our  greatest  enemy  to  song  birds,  and  a  bounty 
ought  to  be  placed  on  him."  (Edgar  C.  Clark,  Wilbraham, 
Hampden  County.) 


502  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

The  above  statements,  coming,  as  they  do,  from  many  sec- 
tions of  the  State,  go  far  to  substantiate  the  claim  made  by 
some  persons  that  the  crow  is  everywhere  the  greatest  nat- 
ural enemy  of  the  smaller  birds.  Professor  Hodge  told  me 
that  crows  had  repeatedly  robbed  robins'  nests  in  a  city  lot, 
under  his  windows,  coming  very  early  in  the  morning,  be- 
fore people  generally  were  out  of  bed.  They  are  just  as 
inveterate  thieves  of  the  eggs  and  young  of  the  larger  birds. 
Several  observers  speak  of  crows  taking  the  eggs  and  young 
of  fowls  and  turkeys.  This  is  a  habit  so  well  known  that 
it  hardly  need  be  alluded  to  here,  except  to  show  their  taste 
for  eggs  and  nestlings. 

Mr.  Price,  at  the  Middlesex  Fells  Reservation,  is  raising 
both  wild  and  domesticated  ducks  and  pheasants.  He  says 
that  crows  took  five  out  of  seven  young  ducks  in  one  day. 
In  June  about  one  hundred  Mallard  ducks  were  turned  out 
on  a  small  pond.  Ducks  lay  their  eggs  very  early  in  the 
morning,  and  every  morning  crows  were  seen  carrying  off 
eggs.  Mr.  Price  says  they  took  about  fifty  each  week,  car- 
rying off,  altogether,  from  eight  hundred  to  one  thousand 
eggs  during  the  season,  taking  about  all  the  eggs  laid  by 
the  ducks. 

It  is  probable  that  where  one  instance  of  crows  robbing 
nests  is  observed,  a  thousand  pass  unnoticed.  There  is 
only  one  redeeming  feature  in  the  case  of  the  crow,  and 
that  is,  that  not  all  crows  habitually  rob  birds'  nests  ;  for  if 
they  did,  they  would  destroy  most  other  birds,  and  in  time 
we  should  have  few  birds  but  crows. 

Squirrels.  —  Forty-two  observers  regard  squirrels  as  very 
injurious  to  birds,  thus  ranking  them  next  to  the  crow  in 
destructiveness,  and  some  regard  them  as  more  vicious  than 
the  crow.  Others  believe  that  squirrels  do  no  harm,  as 
they  have  never  seen  them  troubling  birds  in  any  way,  nor 
seen  birds  manifesting  any  alarm  at  their  presence.  Mr. 
Brewster  is  very  positive  that  the  squirrels  have  never 
troubled  the  birds  at  his  place  in  Cambridge,  where  he  has 
watched  carefully  for  years  the  habits  of  both  birds  and 
squirrels.  Mason  A.  Walton,  the  hermit  of  Gloucester, 
says  that  he  has  several  times  seen  red  squirrels  examining 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  503 

the  nests  of  birds,  but  that  they  never  disturbed  the  nests 
or  young  birds.* 

There  may  be  many  good  squirrels,  but  there  certainly 
are  some  bad  ones,  as  the  literature  of  field  natural  history 
teems  with  instances  of  their  destructiveness.  To  convince 
the  reader,  some  new  evidence  is  appended,  collected  dur- 
ing this  inquiry. 

"Red  squirrels,  I  think,  do  fully  as  much  damage  as 
crows.  For  a  number  of  years  I  had  quite  a  colony  of  red 
squirrels  on  my  premises,  and  protected  them,  as  the  family 
liked  to  see  them  around.  But  one  morning  there  was  a 
great  commotion  among  the  robins  in  the  yard  ;  I  stepped 
to  the  door  with  gun  in  hand,  expecting  to  find  crows,  but, 
on  looking  closely,  found  a  red  squirrel  at  the  nest,  from 
which  he  soon  started,  carrying  something  in  his  mouth.  I 
fired  at  him,  and  he  dropped  to  the  ground,  and  with  him  a 
young  robin  with  the  head  partly  eaten  ;  and  on  looking  the 
ground  over,  I  found  two  others  in  the  same  condition. 
Since  then  by  observing  closely  I  have  found  them  despoil- 
ing the  nests  of  robins  and  other  birds  of  either  the  eggs  or 
young,  and  shoot  them  on  sight,  as  a  nuisance."  ("W.  J. 
Cross.) 

*'  I  was  at  work  in  one  of  my  gardens  when  my  attention 
was  attracted  by  the  cries  of  a  pair  of  thrushes  near  by. 
On  approaching,  I  discovered  a  red  squirrel  sitting  upon 
the  nest,  busily  devouring  their  young.  I  drove  the  little 
rascal  away  with  stones,  but  he  returned  again,  and  had  bit- 
ten the  remaining  birds  before  I  reached  the  nest  again,  it 
being  several  rods  distant.  The  next  day  I  found  nothing 
left  but  the  empty  nest.  The  young  thrushes  were  more 
than  half  grown,  and  were  all  destroyed,  undoubtedly  by 
this  same  squirrel."  (Henry  X.  Smith.) 

"There  is  an  apple  orchard  on  the  rear  of  my  place,  and 
during  the  summer  of  1903  I  was  surprised  to  see  the  robins, 
etc.,  continually  building  new  nests.  They  would  no  sooner 
have  a  nest  finished  and  eggs  laid,  than  they  would  be  at 
work  on  a  new  one,  usually  in  the  same  tree,  the  first  one 

*  "  A  hermit's  wild  friends,"  Mason  A.  Walton,  p.  69. 


504  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

having  been  abandoned  and  the  eggs  missing.  One  day  in 
passing  through  the  orchard  I  saw  some  robins  fluttering  and 
scolding  about  one  of  the  nests,  and,  being  interested,  tried 
to  see  the  cause  of  the  trouble.  I  found  there  was  a  red 
squirrel  sitting  on  the  edge  of  the  nest,  devouring  the  eggs 
as  calmly  as  possible.  I  had  noticed  previously  that  a  pair 
of  red  squirrels  made  their  home  in  a  hole  in  one  of  the 
trees,  and  saw  that  they  were  undoubtedly  the  cause  of  the 
depleted  nests.  I  killed  the  squirrels,  and  there  was  no 
more  trouble."  (I.  C.  Horton.) 

"  Some  five  years  ago  I  noticed  that  some  species  of  birds 
were  decreasing  in  a  certain  small  piece  of  woodland  that  I 
look  over  pretty  carefully,  and  the  many  rifled  nests  con- 
vinced me  the  red  squirrels  were  doing  the  mischief.  I 
started  a  campaign  after  them,  and  from  that  time  until  the 
present  have  shot  them  on  sight.  During  this  time  have 
caught  them  in  the  act  of  rifling  robins'  and  catbirds'  nests, 
and  with  fledglings  in  their  mouths ;  also  found  egg  shells 
around  squirrels'  nests  on  the  ground.  On  one  occasion 
saw  a  pair  of  robins  catch  a  red  squirrel  at  their  nest,  and 
with  the  help  of  others  drive  him  from  it  and  chase  him  to 
cover.  An  egg  had  been  taken  from  this  nest,  which  I  found 
on  the  ground  uninjured,  where  he  evidently  dropped  it  in 
flight.  For  some  time  I  had  another  robin's  egg,  dropped 
by  a  red  squirrel,  that  had  been  neatly  punctured  ready  to 
suck."  (F.  C.  Dodge.) 

"In  the  spring  of  1896  my  attention  was  first  drawn  to 
the  red  squirrels  robbing  birds'  nests.  In  the  early  morning 
I  have  repeatedly  seen  the  red  squirrels  going  from  tree  to 
tree,  hunting  for  birds'  nests.  If  these  nests  contained 
young  birds,  they  were  taken  out  and  eaten  by  the  squirrels. 
The  birds  around  our  place  decreased  rapidly,  and  the  squir- 
rels increased.  Catbirds,  which  had  begun  to  nest  around 
here  in  numbers,  as  the  locality  apparently  suited  them, 
were  entirely  driven  off,  and  no  longer  build  nests  here.  I 
think  it  was  about  four  years  ago  that  we  killed  off  numbers 
of  red  squirrels,  and  the  birds  began  then  to  increase." 
(Amelia  M.  Brastow.) 

' '  I  have  many  times  seen  red  squirrels  in  the  act  of  rob- 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIEDS.  505 

bing  birds'  nests,  and  this  year  saw  a  young  gray  apparently 
at  the  same  trick."  (F.  H.  Kennard.) 

The  foregoing  instances  seem  to  establish  the  fact  that 
certain  squirrels  at  least  which  have  acquired  the  habit  of 
molesting  birds  are  among  their  most  dangerous  enemies. 
Squirrels  are  very  active,  keen  of  sight,  can  climb  anywhere 
in  a  tree,  and  it  is  difficult  for  a  bird  smaller  than  a  hawk  or 
crow  to  defend  its  nest  against  them.  I  have  seen  a  squirrel 
continually  attempt  to  reach  the  nest  of  a  robin,  although, 
being  assailed  from  all  sides  by  both  robins  and  jays,  it  was 
struck  and  repeatedly  driven  back  toward  the  ground.  In 
courage  and  activity  the  red  squirrel  is  superior  to  the  gray, 
and  is  usually  regarded  as  the  greater  enemy  to  birds.  At 
Warehani  the  birds  seem  to  regard  both  species  with  equal 
aversion. 

Some  squirrels  have  a  habit  of  cracking  the  skulls  of 
young  birds,  as  they  would  a  nut.  Mr.  F.  H.  Mosher  tells 
me  he  has  observed  this  habit  at  Hyde  Park,  Dutchess 
County,  X.  Y.,  and  also  at  Dartmouth,  Mass.  At  Hyde 
Park  both  red  and  gray  squirrels  were  observed  in  the  act. 
He  saw  the  squirrels  attack  the  young  on  the  nests  on  six 
different  occasions.  The  birds  molested  were  the  chipping 
sparrow,  robin  and  red-eyed  vireo.  The  squirrel  cut  off 
the  head  of  each  young  bird,  dropping  the  body  to  the 
ground,  and  ate  out  the  brains  from  the  skull.  One  day  in 
the  spring  of  1903  he  heard  the  cries  of  robins  at  his  own 
place  in  Dartmouth.  He  saw  a  gray  squirrel  climbing  to  a 
robin's  nest,  and  before  he  could  reach  the  spot  the  squirrel 
had  the  head  of  a  young  robin  in  its  mouth.  The  bird  was 
dead  when  he  reached  it.  Gray  squirrels  have  been  the 
culprits  in  each  case  but  one  that  he  has  observed. 

Mr.  Brewster  told  me  that  he  saw  a  wounded  thrush  pur- 
sued and  overtaken  by  a  chipmunk,  that  killed  the  bird  and 
was  eating  its  brains  when  he  reached  the  spot.  He  took 
the  bird  from  the  squirrel,  but  the  little  animal  was  so  eager 
and  fearless  that  it  would  not  leave,  but  stood  up  trying  to 
reach  the  bird,  like  a  dog  begging  for  a  bone. 

Mr.  H.  H.  Dewey  writes  from  Xew  Lenox,  Berkshire 
County,  as  follows:  "Last  summer  I  had  occasion  to  ob- 


50G  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

serve  a  nest  of  small  yellowbirds  in  a  willow  bush  near 
where  I  milked  my  cows.  One  morning,  as  I  was  milking, 
I  heard  several  of  the  old  birds  making  a  great  noise  of  dis- 
tress, and  on  going  near  the  nest  I  discovered  a  chipmunk 
just  swallowing  one  of  the  young  ones  which  had  been 
hatched  about  three  days.  The  chipmunk  escaped,  and  on 
going  to  the  nest  I  found  only  one  of  the  four  left.  I  -heard 
the  cries  of  the  old  ones  early  the  next  morning,  and  on 
hurrying  to  the  nest  I  saw  the  last  young  bird  being  swal- 
lowed whole  by  the  chipmunk,  which  again  made  its  es- 
cape. I  have  for  a  number  of  years  been  suspicious  of  the 
little  animals  doing  great  damage  to  either  the  young  birds 
or  the  eggs,  but  have  never  been  able  to  catch  one  in  the 
act  before." 

It  seems  improbable  that  the  chipmunk  actually  swallowed 
a  young  bird  whole,  but  it  may  have  stowed  it  away  in  its 
large  cheek-pouches,  for  convenience  in  carrying  it  oft*.  It 
is  probable  that  only  certain  individuals  among  squirrels 
molest  birds.  Such  individuals  must  be  killed  by  those 
who  would  protect  the  birds. 

The  English  Sparrow. — Many  people  consider  this  the 
most  destructive  of  all  the  natural  enemies  of  birds,  and  it 
may  be  so,  in  and  near  the  cities,  with  the  possible  excep- 
tion of  the  cat.  The  story  of  how  this  bird  was  introduced 
here,  invading  the  cities  and  villages,  destroying  the  native 
birds  or  driving  them  out  into  the  country,  was  told  long 
ago.*  Much  might  be  added  to  it  from  my  own  experience 
and  that  of  correspondents,  but  lack  of  space  forbids. 
There  are  some  localities  in  the  country  to  which  the  spar- 
row has  not  penetrated,  and  it  has  seemed  to  me  that  it  was 
hardly  holding  its  own  for  the  past  few  years,  especially  in 
eastern  Massachusetts,  where  in  some  sections  sparrows  are 
not  so  numerous  as  in  the  past,  and  the  native  birds  are 
beginning  to  reoccupy  their  old  haunts.  The  information 
gained  in  this  inquiry,  however,  does  not  confirm  this  belief, 
for  every  county,  except  Suffolk,  Dukes,  Barnstable  and 

*  "  The  English  sparrow  in  North  America,"  "Walter  B.  Barrows,  Bulletin  I., 
Division  of  Economic  Ornithology  and  Mammalogy,  United  States  Department 
of  Agriculture. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  507 

Nantucket,  sends  reports  of  an  increase  of  these  birds.  The 
only  reports  of  an  increase  in  the  cities  come  from  Fitch- 
burg,  Lowell  and  Waltham ;  all  the  rest  come  from  towns, 
and  many  from  the  smaller  and  more  remote  villages.  All 
this  seems  to  indicate  that,  outside  the  larger  cities,  the 
sparrows  are  still  increasing  in  numbers  and  extending  their 
baleful  influence. 

Evidence  recently  submitted  to,  and  published  by,  Mr. 
C.  A.  Reed,  editor  of  "  American  ornithology,"  *  from  cor- 
respondents in  different  parts  of  the  country,  indicates  that 
the  sparrow  is  still  destructive  to  other  birds.  The  spar- 
row is  largely  responsible  for  the  decrease  in  swallows,  mar- 
tins and  wrens.  For  more  than  thirty  years  it  has  driven 
these  and  other  birds  from  their  former  breeding  places, 
torn  down  their  nests  and  killed  them  and  their  young. 
The  tree  swallows  and  martins  have  been  driven  from  the 
bird-houses.  The  nests  of  the  cliff  swallows  have  been  torn 
down  or  occupied  by  the  sparrows.  The  barn  swallows 
have  been  driven  from  the  buildings  they  formerly  occupied, 
and  because  of  this  persecution  the  wrens  have  actually  dis- 
appeared from  the  neighborhood  of  towns  and  villages.  If 
the  sparrow  is  still  increasing  and  spreading  out  into  the 
country,  we  may  look  for  a  continued  decrease  of  swallows 
and  wrens. 

Hawks. — Every  one  will  admit  that  hawks  kill  birds. 
Thirty-four  observers  consider  them  seriously  destructive. 
It  is  to  be  noted,  however,  that,  as  in  the  case  of  the  fox, 
the  chief  evidence  is  given  by  gunners.  Nevertheless,  it  is 
probably  true  that,  after  man,  the  great  bird  destroyer, 
birds  are  among  the  greatest  enemies  of  birds.  No  other 
animals  can  pursue  birds  through  the  air.  No  others  can 
follow  them  in  their  vast  migrations,  discover  them  so  far 
off,  or  overtake  and  strike  them  so  quickly.  We  must, 
then,  look  among  rapacious  birds  themselves  for  some  of 
the  most  potent  checks  to  bird  increase. 

The  bald  eagle  feeds  mainly  on  fish,  and  has  little  effect  on 
the  numbers  of  other  birds.  The  red-tailed  hawk  is  not  now 
generally  common.  The  red-shouldered  hawk  seldom  kills 

«  Vol.  4,  No.  5,  May,  1904. 


508  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

birds  or  poultry,  but,  living  largely  on  field-mice,  is  believed 
to  be  a  friend  to  the  farmer ;  but  the  goshawk,  duck  hawk, 
Cooper  hawk  and  sharp-shinned  hawk  are  all  bird  slayers. 
Of  these  four,  the  Cooper  and  sharp-shinned  hawks,  being 
most  common,  are  most  destructive.  The  duck  hawk  kills, 
like  the  cat,  for  the  sake  of  killing.  It  pursues  its  prey  on 
the  wing,  rapidly  overtaking  swift-flying  ducks.  Mr.  C.  E. 
Bailey  reports  seeing  a  duck  hawk  overtake  and  strike  three 
teal  in  succession,  and  then  fly  off,  leaving  its  victims  lying 
on  the  water.  Fortunately,  this  hawk  is  rather  rare  in 
Massachusetts.  The  goshawk  is  here  occasionally  in  win- 
ter, but  the  Cooper  hawk  breeds  here,  and  is  still  common, 
locally  if  not  generally.  This  bird,  which  is  sometimes 
known  as  the  partridge  hawk  or  chicken  hawk,  is  a  feath- 
ered pirate.  Swift,  keen  and  daring,  it  is  the  terror  of  both 
birds  and  poultry.  It  is  the  one  bird  of  all  others  to  neu- 
tralize the  local  efforts  of  the  bird  protectionist.  It  is  par- 
ticularly obnoxious  to  the  farmer,  for,  having  once  tasted 
chicken,  it  continues  its  forays  until  it  is  shot  or  the  chick- 
ens shut  up.  It  will  sometimes  kill  full-grown  fowls,  but 
probably  cannot  carry  them  away.  Its  keen  eye  detects  the 
mother  bird  sitting  on  the  nest.  At  one  swoop  it  snatches 
bird,  nest,  eggs  and  all  in  its  powerful  talons ;  or  it  spies 
the  nestlings,  and  picks  them  up  as  food  for  its  own  young. 
Conspicuous  songsters,  like  the  brown  thrasher,  robin,  wood 
thrush,  rose-breasted  grosbeak  and  scarlet  tanager,  are  swept 
from  their  perches  while  in  full  song  by  this  bold  marauder, 
and  borne  to  its  ravening  brood.  Even  the  crafty  blue  jay 
does  not  always  escape.  As  one  of  these  hawks  sweeps  into 
a  clearing  and  strikes  its  prey,  every  bird  song  becomes 
hushed.  In  a  moment  sparrows,  warblers,  thrushes,  titmice, 
—  all  the  loquacious,  musical  throng, — find  cover,  or 
crouch  motionless  in  their  hiding  places  in  silent  terror. 
Grim  death  has  been  among  them,  and  it  is  long  before  they 
dare  resume  their  activities.  The  sharp-shinned  hawk  is  a 
miniature  of  the  Cooper  hawk,  although  perhaps  a  trifle 
slimmer  in  build.  It  is  widely  known  as  the  chicken  hawk, 
and  is  strong  and  swift.  It  is  nearly  as  dangerous  to  birds 
as  its  larger  and  stronger  congener.  It  breeds  here,  feeds 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  509 

its  young  on  birds,  and  will  kill  birds  as  large  as  a  jay.  It 
is  often  mobbed  by  jays,  but  not  infrequently  strikes  one 
of  its  tormentors,  when  all  the  rest  fly  off,  leaving  the  hawk 
to  finish  its  victim. 

Probably  most  of  the  birds  now  killed  by  hawks  in  Mas- 
sachusetts are  struck  down  by  these  two  species.  Some- 
times in  the  fall  these  birds  may  be  seen  in  great  numbers 
migrating  south.  Mr.  W.  S.  Perry  estimates  that  he  saw 
at  least  one  thousand,  mostly  sharp-shinned  and  Cooper 
hawks,  going  south  Oct.  10,  1892.  He  watched  them  flying 
all  day.  He  estimates  that  each  bird  will  eat  on  the  average 
two  small  birds  each  day,  or  seven  hundred  each  year.  At 
that  estimate,  the  one  thousand  hawks  which  came  within 
the  range  of  his  vision  would  eat  seven  hundred  thousand 

C1 

birds  a  year.  I  regard  these  two  birds  and  the  goshawk  as 
the  only  hawks  that  should  be  shot  by  gunners,  most  others 
being  a  positive  benefit,  or  so  rare  as  to  do  little  harm. 

The  pigeon  hawk,  also  a  bird  hawk,  is  not  common,  and 
the  sparrow  hawk  feeds  chiefly  on  insects.  The  broad- 
winged  hawk  seldom  kills  birds,  and  the  marsh  hawk  feeds 
mainly  on  small  mammals  in  most  localities. 

The  Blue  Jay.  —  The  blue  jay,  a  smaller  cousin  of  the 
crow,  has  a  similarly  unsavory  record,  and  also  merits  it. 
It  attacks  the  eggs  of  birds  from  the  size  of  the  smallest 
sparrow  and  warbler  to  that  of  the  robin.  The  robins,  if  at 
hand,  will  successfully  defend  their  nests ;  but  the  jay  will 
watch,  and  sometimes  eventually  appropriates  the  eggs  in 
the  robin's  absence.  The  jay  pays  little  attention  to  the 
screaming  and  protesting  vireos,  but  robs  their  nests  as  un- 
concernedly as  though  the  parent  birds  were  not  present. 
When  jays  have  young  in  the  nest,  they  sometimes  watch 
the  nests  of  the  smaller  birds  very  closely.  Hardly  is  a 
clutch  laid  when  it  disappears,  and  most  of  the  smaller  birds 
lose  at  least  one  set  of  eggs.  I  am  aware  that  many  people 
find  it  hard  to  believe  that  such  a  pretty  bird  as  the  blue  jay 
can  be  such  a  rascal ;  therefore,  I  will  not  ask  belief  for  my 
own  assertions  without  producing  evidence  to  support  them, 
for  the  mere  fact  that  twenty-six  observers  believe  the  jay 
to  be  a  destructive  enemy  of  the  smaller  birds  may  not  be 


510  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

considered  sufficient  evidence  on  which  to  condemn  the 
bird. 

* '  Last  spring  I  was  disturbed  several  mornings  by  an 
outcry  among  the  birds  in  the  trees  near  the  house.  A  pair 
of  blue  jays  were  on  a  marauding  tour,  and  eggs  were  the 
morning's  bill  of  fare."  (Thomas  Allen,  Bernardston, 
Franklin  County.) 

"  The  crows  and  jays  are  destructive  to  the  sparrows, 
robins  and  vireos  that  build  in  our  orchard  beside  the 
house,  where  I  have  a  good  chance  to  see  them.  I  believe 
the  jays  are  about  as  bad  as  the  crows.  Several  robins' 
nests  are  broken  up  in  this  way  every  year,  and  always 
one,  and  generally  two  or  three,  of  each  of  the  others." 
(J.  K.  Burgess,  Dedham,  Norfolk  County.) 

"I  have  a  neighbor  .  .  .  who  has  shot  one  or  two  jays 
in  the  very  act  of  robbing  eggs  from  nests."  (Daniel  Bal- 
lard,  Millington,  Franklin  County.) 

"  I  have  seen  blue  jays  repeatedly  sitting  on  the  edge  of 
a  nest,  eating  the  eggs.  This  season  I  found  a  nest  of  a 
Vireo  solitarius.  ...  I  discovered  a  blue  jay  in  the  act  of 
eating  up  the  eggs.  When  I  went  to  the  nest  there  was 
only  one  left,  and  the  shells  of  three  others.  I  have  had  the 
same  experience  this  year  with  the  nest  of  Dendroica  virens. 
I  think  jays  torment  these  birds  worse  than  any  others.  I 
am  convinced  that  jays,  during  nesting  time,  hunt  for  eggs 
with  great  skill  and  regularity."  (John  E.  Thayer,  Lan- 
caster, Worcester  County.) 

Colonel  Thayer  also  writes  of  Mr.  William  Brewster's 
experience.  This  Mr.  Brewster  has  told  me  of  personally. 
The  methodical  manner  in  which  the  jays  investigated  the 
nests  of  other  birds  day  after  day,  and  destroyed  the  eggs, 
has  convinced  him  of  their  destructiveness.  He  says  :  "I 
do  not  consider  that  owls,  hawks  (except  the  Cooper  and 
sharp-shinned),  squirrels,  weasels  or  even  foxes  do  any 
serious  harm.  The  blue  jay  does  very  much  harm  to  the 
smaller  birds  by  eating  their  eggs;  and  the  crow  is  also 
harmful  in  the  same  way,  but  to  a  less  degree,  according  to 
my  experience." 

Mr.  S.  J.  Harris  of  East  Dedham,  Norfolk  County,  speaks 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  511 

of  his  experience  with  jays  as  follows  :  "Of  course  the  old 
robins  would  fight  the  jays  away  for  a  while,  but  they  would 
come  right  back  again.  1  have  known  of  a  bluebird's  nest 
with  four  or  five  eggs  in  it  being  robbed  by  jays,  for  I  came 
along  in  time  to  hear  the  scrimmage,  and,  on  seeing  the  blue 
jay  in  the  bluebird's  nest,  with  the  bluebirds  screaming  and 
flying  at  the  jay,  I  went  and  found  all  the  eggs  broken,  and 
the  jay  had  eaten  the  insides." 

Owls.  —  Owls  certainly  kill  some  birds,  but  the  number 
they  take  is  ordinarily  so  small  in  proportion  to  the  noxious 
mammals  and  insects  they  destroy  that  they  are  believed  to 
be  among  the  most  useful  of  birds.  It  is,  however,  rather 
amusing  to  hear  one  friend  of  the  screech  owl  defending  it 
from  the  charge  of  killing  small  birds,  and  asserting  that  it 
lives  on  mice  and  insects,  while  another  says  that  it  is  most 
useful  because  it  destroys  so  many  English  sparrows.  I 
have  known  a  screech  owl  to  kill  a  flicker,  occupy  its  nest 
and  make  a  meal  of  the  owner.  Owls  kill  many  mice, 
shrews,  squirrels,  rabbits  and  other  small  mammals,  and  a 
few  birds.  The  larger  species  probably  kill  some  game 
birds.  The  owls  are  not  so  destructive  to  birds  as  either 
hawks  or  crows.  Were  they  exterminated,  we  should  miss 
them  sadly.  The  quavering  wail  of  the  screech  owl  at  even- 
ing is  one  of  the  characteristic  sounds  of  our  orchards  and 
woodlands  ;  it  is  becoming  altogether  too  rare  in  some  local- 
ities. The  booming  hoot  of  the  horned  owl,  now  seldom 
heard,  gives  warning  of  the  approach  of  the  most  dangerous 
owl  of  our  woods.  It  kills  many  hares,  or  so-called  rabbits, 
mice  and  rats,  and  is  in  this  respect  a  friend  to  the  farmer. 

Weasels.  —  Only  seventeen  people  complain  of  the  weasel, 
and  much  of  the  evidence  against  it  is  that  of  killing  chickens. 
I  have  for  years  heard  the  statement  made  that  weasels  were 
very  destructive  to  game  birds.  I  have  followed  them  for 
miles,  and  watched  them  whenever  I  could.  I  have  written 
many  letters  to  people  who  regard  them  as  destructive,  but 
the  nearest  thing  to  evidence  against  them  that  has  come  to 
me  yet  is  contained  in  the  following  notes. 

Mr.  Thomas  Allen  of  Bernardston  says:  "Weasels  are 
too  sly  and  quick  in  movement  to  be  caught.  The  bird  with 


512  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

small,  clean-cut  teeth  marks  in  the  neck  or  under  the  wing 
is  proof  of  this  enemy." 

Mr.  H.  B.  Bigelow  of  Cohasset  writes:  "Weasels  kill 
some  small  birds,  principally  sparrows,  along  stone  walls 
and  hedge  rows,  where  I  have  found  several  carcasses,  prin- 
cipally, however,  English  sparrows.  In  Milton  I  saw  a 
weasel  stalk  an  English  sparrow  along  a  stone  wall.  They 
are  said  to  destroy  some  quail." 

Weasels  are  remarkably  savage  and  bloodthirsty  animals, 
but  seem  to  feed  mostly  on  mice,  shrews  and  moles,  for 
which  they  hunt  daily.  When  hunting  they  quarter  over 
the  ground  much  more  closely  than  does  the  fox,  therefore 
they  are  more  likely  to  stumble  on  the  nests  of  birds.  An 
animal  which  can  kill  six  fowls  in  a  night,  as  I  have  known 
a  weasel  to  do,  would  easily  kill  a  sitting  grouse  or  any 
smaller  bird  which  it  could  surprise  on  its  nest  at  night. 

The  weasel  is  very  brave  and  active.  Weasels  occasion- 
ally attack  even  human  beings.  There  is  an  old  story  of 
an  English  girl  who  was  found  dead  on  a  moor,  her  body 
partly  eaten  by  a  party  of  weasels.  I  was  once,  when  a 
boy,  attacked  by  ten  of  these  creatures.  They  made  the 
occasion  quite  interesting  for  me  for  some  minutes,  and  by 
reason  of  their  great  activity  all  but  one  escaped  unharmed. 

Mr.  John  Burroughs  has  observed  that  weasels  can  climb 
trees.*  This  makes  them  much  more  formidable  enemies  to 
birds  than  they  otherwise  would  be,  but,  as  their  vision  is 
not  particularly  acute,  and  as  they  rely  largely  on  scent, 
they  are  likely  to  be  often  at  fault.  Fortunately,  they  are 
not  common,  but  I  have  never  seen  any  explanation  for 
their  comparative  scarcity.  They  have  many  young  and  few 
enemies,  although  the  larger  hawks  and  owls  get  some  of 
them.  They  can  escape  the  fox  by  climbing  or  hiding. 
Weasels  are  not  often  shot,  and  traps  are  seldom  set  for 
them,  but  they  are  often  caught  in  traps  set  for  other  ani- 
mals. 

It  is  quite  possible  that  these  bloodthirsty,  ravenous  crea- 
tures are  cannibals.  Other  carnivorous  animals,  such  as 
predaceous  beetles,  owls  and  wolves,  are  cannibalistic.  Mr. 

*  "  Squirrels  and  other  fur  bearers,"  John  Burroughs,  p.  87. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF  BIEDS.  513 

Burroughs  records  that  when  a  pair  of  weasels  was  kept  in 
captivity,  one  killed  and  ate  the  other,  picking  the  bones 
clean.*  Their  cannibalistic  tendencies  and  the  work  of  the 
trapper  may  account  for  their  comparative  scarcity. 

The  Mink.  — Minks  feed  along  water  courses,  where  they 
kill  a  water-fowl  now  and  then.  They  also  make  excursions 
overland,  killing  mice,  as  does  the  weasel.  At  times  they 
kill  many  domestic  fowls  and  some  birds.  Mr.  Brewster 
has  recorded,  in  "Bird-lore,"  the  almost  complete  destruc- 
tion of  a  colony  of  bank  swallows  by  one  or  more  minks. 
Mr.  H.  B.  Bigelow  says  :  '  *  Minks  kill  few  if  any  quail  or 
partridges,  but  a  good  many  ducks  on  the  marshes.  I  have 
found  black  ducks,  evidently  killed  and  partly  eaten  by 
them."  Their  fur  is  valuable  now  ;  they  are  trapped  much, 
so  they  are  rather  rare,  which  is  fortunate  for  birds  and 
poultry. 

The  Skunk.  —  The  skunk  is  a  sluggish  and  rather  stupid 
animal,  but  knows  enough  to  steal  young  chickens  from  under 
the  mother  at  night.  When  a  boy  I  once  surprised  a  skunk 
apparently  eating  some  grouse  eggs,  while  the  bird  hovered 
round,  afraid  to  come  to  close  quarters.  Wishing  to  inter- 
rupt the  proceedings,  I  undertook  to  investigate,  but  was  so 
warmly  received  by  the  undaunted  animal  that  it  was  soon 
left  in  undisputed  possession  of  its  ill-gotten  meal.  Prob- 
ably the  injury  done  by  skunks  to  birds  has  been  exagger- 
ated. While  occasionally  they  may  stumble  on  a  nest  of 
eggs  or  young  birds,  they  are  too  slow  to  pursue  and  over- 
take any  bird  that  is  able  to  use  its  wings  or  legs.  I  have 
seen  forty  fowls  roosting  two  and  one-half  feet  from  the 
ground  in  safety,  while,  night  after  night,  skunks  came  and 
ate  refuse  from  the  ground  in  the  same  coop. 

Hunters,  finding  the  nest  of  a  game  bird  despoiled  of  its 
contents,  are  very  likely  to  attribute  it  to  a  skunk,  without 
sufficient  evidence.  Most  people  who  have  been  much  in 
the  woods  believe  that  skunks  eat  many  birds' and  turtles' 
eggs ;  but  thus  far  I  have  been  able  to  find  but  one  man 
who  has  seen  the  skunk  eating  birds'  eggs.  This  may  be 
mainly  because  the  skunk  usually  hunts  at  night ;  but  Mr. 

*  "  Squirrels  and  other  fur  bearers,"  John  Burroughs,  p.  87. 


514  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

Martin  L.  Sornborger  writes  from  Haydenville  that  he  has 
actually  seen  the  skunk  eating  the  eggs  in  a  grouse's  nest. 
He  also  says  he  has  found  the  remains  of  young  birds  in  the 
stomachs  of  some  skunks  that  he  has  examined. 

Other  Minor  Enemies.  —  Three  observers  each  report 
snakes,  pheasants  and  orioles  as  destructive  to  young  birds. 
The  black  snake  is  a  deadly  enemy  to  birds,  and  eats  the 
young  in  nests  both  on  the  ground  and  in  trees.  Other 
species  of  snakes  are  probably  less  destructive. 

The  introduced  pheasant  (Phasianus  torquatus)  is  reported 
as  killing  young  chickens  and  game  birds,  but  the  evidence 
against  it  is  circumstantial,  and  not  very  strong. 

Orioles  are  reported  as  tearing  down  the  nests  of  other 
birds  and  destro}dng  the  eggs, — a  trick  of  Avhich  a  few 
individuals  are  undoubtedly  guilty. 

Raccoons,  being  nocturnal,  omnivorous  and  fair  climbers, 
are  probably  destructive  wherever  they  are  common  ;  but 
there  is  little  evidence  against  them  as  destroyers  of  birds,  and 
they  are  no  longer  numerous  in  many  parts  of  this  State. 

A   DISCUSSION    OF    SOME    SUGGESTIONS   FOR   THE    BETTER 

PROTECTION  OF  BIRDS. 

In  reply  to  the  request  to  suggest  means  for  the  better 
protection  of  birds,  several  hundred  suggestions  were  re- 
ceived, which  may  be  classed  under  forty-six  different 
heads.  Those  which  appear  to  be  of  sufficient  importance 
to  merit  discussion  are  arranged  below,  and  for  convenience 
classed  under  four  principal  heads. 

1.     Suggestions  regarding  Education  and  Moral  Suasion. 


PROPOSED  MEASURE. 


Number 
advocating  it. 


Educate   the  children   in   regard   to  birds,  and   interest 

them  in  their  lives. 
Arouse  an  interest  in  the  public  generally  in  these  matters, 

Arouse  the  Massachusetts  patrons  of  husbandry  to  act  on 

bird  protection. 
Form  clubs  under  the  auspices  of  the  League  of  American 

Sportsmen. 


26 
1 
1 
1 


No.  4.] 


DECEEASE   OF   BIRDS. 


515 


2.     Suggestions  regarding  the  Enactment  and  Enforcement  of  Legisla- 
tion to  regulate  Shooting. 


PROPOSED  MEASURE. 


Number 
advocating  it. 


(a)   General  Measures. 
Enforce  the  laws  now  on  the  statute  books, 

Demand  more  stringent  laws,  ...... 

License  all  shooters,         ....... 

Establish  a  close  season  on  all  game  birds  for  three  years, 
Establish  a  close  season  on  all  game  birds  for  five  years, 
Establish  a  close  season  on  all  game  birds  for  ten  years,  . 
Shorter  open  seasons,       ....... 

Stop  all  spring  shooting,  ...... 

Prohibit  the  use  of  bird  dogs,  ...... 

Have  owners  of  land  post  notices  forbidding  trespassing, 
Prevent  sale  of  all  game  birds,         .         .         .         .         . 

Stop  all  collecting  for  scientific  purposes, 

Provide  heavier  penalties,         ...... 

Limit  the  number  of  birds  to  be  taken  in  a  day, 

Forbid  all  shooting  by  aliens,  ...... 

Forbid  use  of  all  live  decoys,  ...... 

Regulate  bird  shooting  in  the  Southern  States, 
Forbid  all  bird  shooting  by  boys,     . 
Forbid  use  of  automatic  guns,  . 

(6)    Measures  relating  to  the  Fish  and  Game  Commission. 
Larger  appropriations  for  the  commission, 

Appoint  more  paid  deputies,    ...... 

A  law  giving  the  right  of  search  without  warrant,    . 


25 

10 
10 
6 
3 
3 
4 
5 
5 
4 
3 
3 
2 
2 
2 
2 
2 
1 
1 

6 
19 

7 


516 


BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 


3.     Suggestions  regarding  Bounty  Legislation. 


PROPOSED  MEASURE. 


Number 
advocating  it. 


Offer  State  bounty  on  the  heads  of  cats,   .... 
Offer  State  bounty  on  the  heads  of  foxes, 
Offer  State  bounty  on  the  heads  of  crows, 

Offer  State  bounty  on  the  heads  of  hawks,  or  certain 

hawks. 
Offer  State  bounty  on  the  heads  of  English  sparrows, 

Offer  State  bounty  on  the  heads  of  owls,  .... 
Offer  State  bounty  on  the  heads  of  weasels, 
Offer  State  bounty  on  the  heads  of  skunks, 

Encourage  in  every  way  the  hunting  of  birds'  natural 
enemies. 


4.     Miscellaneous  Suggestions. 


License  cats,    ......... 

Kill  off  the  jays,      ........ 

Kill  off  the  red  squirrels,          ...... 

Put  bells  on  cats, 

Confine  cats  when  birds  are  learning  to  fly, 

Put  wire  collars  on  trees,  to  keep  off  cats, 

Plant  food  plants  and  shelter  plants  for  birds,  . 

Give  better  protection  from  forest  fires,    .... 

Establish  State  reservations  where  birds  will  be  protected, 
Appoint  judges  who  will  fine  people  for  illegal  shooting. 
Prevent  spraying  trees,    ....  .         . 

Stop  immigration  from  Italy,   ... 
Protect  birds  from  English  sparrow, 


11 
5 
4 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
4 

i 

i 
i 

i 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  517 

Educational  Work. 

We  must  awaken  an  enlightened,  all-pervading  public 
sentiment  in  favor  of  bird  protection ;  then  there  will  be  no 
difficulty  in  enacting  legislation  and  taking  measures  which 
will  prevent  the  extirpation  of  our  native  species  of  birds. 
Until  this  is  done,  all  laws  for  the  protection  of  birds  will 
be  more  or  less  inoperative  ;  no  law  will  be  generally  re- 
spected or  can  be  fully  enforced.  The  citizen  must  under- 
stand that  the  bird  is  the  property  of  the  State,  and  must 
take  a  lively  interest  in  its  preservation,  guarding  its  exist- 
ence as  he  would  that  of  his  own  domesticated  animals. 
He  should  also  have  an  abiding  interest  in  its  life,  its  propa- 
gation, its  food  and  its  enemies.  Such  an  interest  must  be 
awakened  first  in  the  school  children,  for  every  sane,  nor- 
mal child  has  the  instincts  of  a  naturalist.  Children  should 
be  taught  not  to  skin  birds  or  collect  their  eggs,  but  to 
build  bird-houses,  furnish  materials  for  building  nests,  feed 
birds-,  and  attract  them  about  the  home.  They  should  be 
taught  the  usefulness  of  birds  as  destroyers  of  injurious  in- 
sects and  noxious  mammals.  They  should  be  taught  also  to 
plant  shrubs  and  trees  that  will  furnish  the  birds  food  and 
protection.  It  is  noticeable  that  twenty-six  people  suggest 
that  children  be  taught  to  value  birds.  The  importance  of 
this  measure  is  becoming  generally  appreciated.  The  fact 
that  so  many  observers  have  reported  the  slaughter  of  birds 
by  boys  with  guns  and  air  rifles,  and  the  collecting  of  birds' 
eggs  by  children,  indicates  that  bird-study  is  not  properly 
taught  among  the  children  in  some  localities.  Many  ob- 
servers report,  however,  that  in  their  sections  there  is  little 
birds-egging  or  shooting  of  birds  by  boys  ;  and  it  seems  to 
be  quite  generally  believed  that  this  is  due  to  an  increased 
interest  in  the  living  birds,  caused  by  such  influences  as  the 
work  of  the  Audubon  Society,  and  that  of  the  Society  for 
the  Prevention  of  Cruelty  to  Animals,  by  nature  study  in 
the  schools,  by  humane  education  and  by  a  general  public 
interest  in  these  subjects.  No  one  can  deny  that  a  great 
change  in  public  sentiment  regarding  birds  already  has 
begun. 


518  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

The  reduction  in  the  amount  of  native  birds'  feathers 
worn  as  millinery  ornaments  and  the  falling  off  in  the  traf- 
fic and  business  of  taxidermists  are  among  the  visible  results 
of  the  change  of  sentiment,  which  has  been  wrought  largely 
through  the  influence  of  the  Audubon  Society. 

An  increased  interest  in  animated  nature  was  aroused  and 
fostered  more  than  twenty-five  years  ago  in  the  State  by  the 
Boston  Society  of  Natural  History  and  the  Worcester  Nat- 
ural History  Society.  Nature  study  has  grown  in  popu- 
larity in  many  States  ever  since.  Massachusetts  has  kept 
well  on  the  crest  of  the  great  wave  of  interest  in  animated 
nature  which  has  swept  over  the  country.  This  movement 
will  result  in  lamentable  failure,  unless  it  protects  from  ex- 
tirpation those  plants  and  animals  the  study  of  which  is  one 
of  its  chief  reasons  for  existence.  The  work  of  the  Ameri- 
can Ornithologists'  Union  has  accomplished  more  for  the 
protection  of  sea  birds  and  shore  birds  on  their  breeding 
grounds  than  that  of  any  other  organization.  It  is  due  to 
this  work  that  gulls,  terns,  other  sea  birds  and  shore  birds 
breeding  along  both  coasts  of  the  United  States  have  been 
saved  from  decimation  or  extirpation  at  the  hands  of  gun- 
ners, milliners,  hunters  and  eggers.  This  work  has  now 
been  transferred  to  the  recently  organized  National  Associa- 
tion of  Audubon  Societies. 

Every  member  of  the  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  every 
branch  of  the  League  of  American  Sportsmen,  every  nat- 
ural history  club  or  society,  every  Agassiz  chapter,  every 
grange  of  the  Patrons  of  Husbandry,  every  sportsmen's 
organization,  should  give  active  support  to  all  measures  that 
will  help  to  maintain  or  increase  the  numbers  of  useful  in- 
sectivorous birds,  game  birds,  shore  birds  and  wild  fowl, 
and  all  should  hold  up  the  hands  of  the  United  States  Bio- 
logical Survey  in  securing  consistent  State  laws  to  protect 
the  birds  during  their  migrations  both  north  and  south. 
The  publication  and  distribution  of  literature  regarding  the 
usefulness  of  birds  and  the  necessity  for  their  protection 
should  be  undertaken  by  all  such  societies.  The  public  press 
can  help  much  by  printing  short  articles  oh  these  subjects. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF  BIRDS.  519 

Suggestions  regarding  the  Enactment  and  Enforcement  of 
Legislation  against  Excessive  Hunting  and  Shooting. 

Twenty-five  correspondents  urge  the  enforcement  of  the 
laws  now  on  the  statute  books  as  the  sovereign  remedy  for 
all  ills  now  apparent.  These  statutes  are  certainly  wise  in 
the  main,  but  some  of  them  are  not  sustained  by  public  sen- 
timent, and  therefore  are  not  respected.  Such  is  the  law 
forbidding  Sunday  fishing.  Sunday  hunting  also  is  quite 
freely  indulged  in,  in  localities  where  the  deputies  of  the 
Fish  and  Game  Commission  are  not  at  hand  to  enforce  the 
law.  Local  authorities  do  little  to  enforce  the  game  laws. 
Legislatures,  while  giving  fish  and  game  commissions  full 
authority  to  enforce  the  law,  usually  hamper  its  enforcement 
by  granting  inadequate  appropriations ;  so  that  such  commis- 
sions are  obliged  to  depend  much  on  the  services  of  unpaid 
officers,  who  can  devote  comparatively  little  time  to  their 
ungracious  and  thankless  task.  Notwithstanding  this  handi- 
cap, the  officers  of  the  Massachusetts  Fish  and  Game  Com- 
mission secured  fifty-five  arrests  in  1904  for  infractions  of 
the  Sunday  law.  The  fines  paid  amounted  to  six  hundred 
and  ten  dollars,  and  only  nine  cases  were  discharged  or  filed. 

Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  Massachusetts  commis- 
sioners have  been  very  efficient,  and  are  now  enforcing  the 
law  better  than  ever  before,  fifty-eight  persons  report  that 
the  laws  are  either  indifferently  enforced,  or  not  enforced  at 
all,  in  their  sections ;  fifty-seven ,  however,  report  that  they 
are  well  enforced :  thirty-two  say  "  fairly  well ;"  and  nine- 
teen "as  well  as  possible  under  the  circumstances."  Some 
report  that  the  laws  are  "respected"  in  many  of  the  country 
towns.  The  farming  population  of  Massachusetts  is  gen- 
erally a  law-abiding  class  ;  but  the  laws  would  be  better 
respected  if  better  known.  If  every  farmer  in  the  Com- 
monwealth could  have  mailed  to  him  a  printed  copy  of  the 
bird  and  game  laws,  there  would  be  fewer  infractions  of 
these  statutes  by  the  rural  population.  Probably  not  one 
person  in  ten  knows  these  laws.  All  hope  of  an}r  better 
enforcement  of  the  bird  laws  by  this  commission  lies  in  the 
direction  of  making  the  force  of  wardens  larger  and  more 


520  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

efficient.  The  Fish  and  Game  Commissioners  are  authorized, 
empowered  and  directed  to  enforce  the  fish  and  game  laws 
of  the  State;  this  they  are  now  doing  as  well  as  they  can, 
with  the  limited  means  at  their  command. 

Six  reports  advocate  giving  the  officers  of  the  commission 
a  right  to  search  suspected  persons  in  the  field  without  pro- 
curing a  warrant.  Such  an  enactment  may  not  be  constitu- 
tional, but  is  greatly  needed.  Every  citizen  who  believes 
in  the  protection  of  our  game  birds  and  song  birds  should 
favor  such  a  law.  It  would  help  greatly  to  stop  ferreting, 
killing  game  birds  out  of  season,  and  the  shooting  and  trap- 
ping of  the  smaller  birds  by  boys  and  foreigners. 

A  large  number  of  correspondents  demand  more  stringent 
laws  than  those  now  on  the  statute  books.  A  close  season 
of  from  three  to  ten  years  on  all  game  birds,  ducks  and 
shore  birds,  as  advocated  by  twelve  correspondents,  would 
undoubtedly  help  the  birds ;  this  is  the  only  certain  way  to 
check  the  extirpation  of  the  shore  birds.  But  this  plan 
might  be  opposed  by  nearly  all  sportsmen  and  shooters 
generally,  and  there  is  little  hope  of  its  adoption  until  such 
time  as  the  danger  of  exterminating  the  birds  shall  become 
patent  to  every  one.  Shorter  open  seasons  no  doubt  would 
help ;  but,  unless  the  season  is  made  of  uniform  length  for 
all  game  birds,  it  is  rather  ineffectual  to  shorten  the  season 
on  one  species,  for  when  men  are  in  the  field  with  guns  in 
their  hands,  all  game  birds  will  be  shot. 

Five  correspondents  advise  the  stopping  of  all  spring 
shooting.  This  is  the  most  important  measure  yet  proposed 
which  seems  to  have  any  hope  of  success.  If  all  spring 
and  summer  shooting  could  be  stopped  throughout  the  United 
States  and  Canada,  we  should  be  nearer  the  solution  of  the 
problem  of  bird  protection  than  we  shall  be  likely  soon  to 
get  in  any  other  way.  The  laws  of  Massachusetts  already 
protect  the  partridge,  woodcock,  quail,  wood  duck,  black 
duck,  teal,  plover,  snipe,  rail  and  marsh  or  beach  birds  in 
spring;  but  plover,  snipe,  rail  and  marsh  or  beach  birds 
may  be  killed  after  July  15.  This  summer  shooting  must 
be  stopped  eventually.  The  river  ducks  should  all  have  the 
same  protection  in  spring  that  is  now  given  to  black  duck, 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  521 

wood  duck  and  teal ;  and  it  would  be  wise  to  forbid  all 
spring  and  summer  shooting  of  water-fowl.  A  moderate 
amount  of  shooting  in  the  fall,  after  the  birds  have  bred, 
does  not  reduce  their  average  numbers  perceptibly  from 
year  to  year ;  but  spring  shooting  tends  toward  extermi- 
nation. 

When  we  have  done  what  remains  to  be  done  in  Massa- 
chusetts, some  influence  must  be  brought  to  bear  on  other 
States ;  for,  if  the  birds  are  shot  on  their  way  north 
through  the  southern  and  middle  States,  and  also  in  Nova 
Scotia  and  Newfoundland,  protection  here  will  have  only 
partial  results.  The  Province  of  Quebec  protects  shore 
birds  in  spring  in  most  of  her  territory ;  but  Nova  Scotia 
laws  now  give  shore  birds,  except  snipe,  no  spring  protec- 
tion. New  Brunswick  protects  them  on  a  large  part  of  her 
coast.  All  the  New  England  States  excepting  Rhode  Island 
now  prohibit  the  shooting  of  shore  birds  during  one  or 
more  of  the  spring  months,  but  the  laws  of  the  different 
States  do  not  coincide.  Massachusetts  leads  the  New  Eng- 
land States  by  protecting  practically  all  shore  birds  in 
spring.  New  York  protects  them  in  spring  and  summer. 
New  Jersey  protects  shore  birds  from  January  1  to  May  1. 
Maryland  and  Delaware  give  them  no  adequate  spring  pro- 
tection. Virginia  protects  most  of  the  shore  birds  in  spring. 
In  New  Hanover  County,  North  Carolina,  shore  birds  may 
be  shot  from  September  1  to  April  1.  In  South  Carolina, 
Georgia  and  Florida  they  are  practically  unprotected. 

If  the  laws  of  all  these  States  could  be  so  amended  as  to 
prevent  any  shooting  of  the  shore  birds  from  January  1  to 
September  1,  we  might  expect  to  see  a  resultant  increase 
among  those  birds  which,  like  the  black-bellied  plover, 
migrate  mainly  up  and  down  the  coast.  Such  a  law,  how- 
ever, would  not  greatly  affect  such  species  as  the  Eskimo 
curlew,  the  golden  plover  and  the  Bartrauiian  sandpiper 
or  upland  plover,  which  migrate  north  through  the  in- 
terior, as  the  abundance  of  these  birds  is  governed  to  a 
considerable  extent  by  the  amount  of  spring  killing  done  in 
the  Mississippi  valley  States.  Some  States  in  this  region 
give  these  species  no  protection  in  the  spring.  The  laws 


522  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

of  Wisconsin,  Louisiana,  Michigan,  Minnesota,  Missouri  and 
Ohio,  however,  now  protect  plover  either  partially  or 
wholly  from  spring  shooting. 

In  regard  to  legislating  against  spring  duck  shooting, 
Massachusetts,  in  protecting  only  wood  duck,  black  duck 
and  teal,  from  March  1  to  September  1,  is  already  be- 
hind New  Hampshire,  Vermont,  Ohio,  Michigan,  Wiscon- 
sin and  Minnesota;  for  these  States  prohibit  all,  or  nearly 
all,  duck  shooting  during  most  of  the  winter  and  spring 
months.  New  Brunswick  prohibits  the  shooting  of  wood 
duck,  black  duck,  Brant,  teal  and  geese  between  Decem- 
ber 2  and  September  1.  Nova  Scotia,  however,  protects 
only  "blue-winged  duck,"  teal  and  wood  duck  in  spring. 
The  Province  of  Quebec  protects  all  wild  duck  except 
sheldrake  in  much  of  her  territory  from  March  1  to  Sep- 
tember 1,  while  Ontario  sets  an  example,  which  we  may 
well  follow,  by  protecting  all  ducks  from  December  16  to 
September  1.  Newfoundland,  Maine,  New  Hampshire, 
New  York  and  Georgia  protect  either  some  or  all  ducks, 
beginning  at  a  date  before  April  1.*  With  the  exception  of 
the  States  named,  not  any  Atlantic  Coast  State  or  Gulf  State 
protects  ducks,  except  wood  duck  in  Virginia  and  Louisi- 
ana, before  the  first  of  April. f  If  all  ducks  and  shore 
birds  which  migrate  south  could  be  protected  there  and 
along  their  routes  of  migration  after  the  first  day  of  Janu- 
ary, and  also  throughout  the  spring  and  summer,  both  in 
migration  and  on  their  breeding  grounds,  it  seems  probable 
that  the  diminution  in  their  numbers  might  be  checked.  If 
all  organizations  interested  in  the  protection  of  birds  or 
game  would  work  together  for  this  end,  it  might  be  accom- 
plished. 

The  prohibition  of  the  use  of  bird  dogs,  if  it  were  possible, 
would  undoubtedly  save  many  birds,  for  some  men  would 
be  unable  to  find  birds  were  it  not  for  then?  dogs.  But  dogs 
will  be  used  so  long  as  birds  are  shot  for  sport  or  market. 
They  ought,  however,  to  be  confined  during  the  breeding 

*  Farmers'  Bulletin  No.  207,  "  Game  laws  for  1904,"  by  T.  S.  Palmer,  Henry 
Oldys  and  E.  S.  Williams,  Jr.,  of  the  Biological  Survey,  United  States  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture. 

t  This  applies  also  to  certain  counties  of  North  Carolina  and  Alabama. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  523 

season  of  the  birds,  that  they  may  have  no  opportunity  to 
destroy  the  eggs  or  young. 

Posting  Land.  —  Owners  of  land  will  accomplish  little  in 
the  way  of  bird  protection  by  merely  posting  notices  forbid- 
ding trespassing  or  shooting,  for  many  shooters  pay  little 
attention  to  such  notices.  They  are  useful,  however,  where 
there  is  a  man  to  patrol  the  land  posted,  and  see  that  shoot- 
ers keep  off,  for  notices  define  the  limits  of  the  guarded 
land,  and  serve  as  a  warning  to  all  trespassers. 

The  prevention  of  the  sale  of  all  game  birds  taken  in  the 
State,  which  is  advocated  by  three  persons,  is  a  wise  meas- 
ure, and  one  which  must  be  undertaken  sooner  or  later, 
unless  other  measures  are  adopted  to  save  the  game.  The 
amount  of  native  game  marketed  here  has  greatly  de- 
creased already.  Our  marketmen  are  now  obliged  to  send 
to  Europe,  the  Antilles  and  other  regions  to  secure  a  supply 
of  game  for  home  consumption.  Over  forty  States  and 
Territories  already  prohibit  the  sale  of  either  a  part  of  or 
all  the  game  taken  within  their  limits.  All  the  British 
North  American  Provinces  prohibit  the  sale  of  certain  ani- 
mals or  game  birds,  or  both.  Massachusetts  is  behind  the 
leaders  in  this  movement.  She  must  eventually  stand  with 
Arkansas,  Colorado,  Hawaii,  Michigan,  Minnesota  and 
Texas,  which  forbid  the  sale  of  all,  or  nearly  all,  birds 
protected  by  the  laws.  Eventually  poultry  and  pigeons,  or 
artificially  propagated  game  birds,  and  water-fowl,  raised  by 
our  farmers  and  poultrymen,  probably  will  largely  take  the 
place  in  our  markets  so  long  filled  by  wild  game  birds. 

Heavier  penalties  for  infractions  of  the  game  laws  might 
be  provided,  and  perhaps  would  cause  them  to  be  more  gen- 
erally respected. 

A  law  limiting  the  number  of  birds  to  be  taken  in  a  day 
is  in  force  in  several  States,  and  may  be  of  some  service 
with  conscientious  sportsmen,  but  it  is  difficult  of  enforce- 
ment. 

To  forbid  the  use  of  live  decoys  would  help  to  protect  the 
water  birds.  The  arguments  for  such  a  law  will  apply  with 
less  force  to  decoys  of  all  kinds  ;  but  there  are  many  diffi- 
culties in  the  way  of  enacting  or  enforcing  such  laws. 


524  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

The  use  of  the  automatic  gun  should  be  prohibited.  No 
one  who  regards  the  protection  of  game  as  important  should 
ever  use  one. 

Those  who  wish  to  forbid  all  shooting  by  boys  and  aliens 
are  right;  unquestionably  this  should  be  done.  There 
should  be  an  age  limit  for  shooters,  and  the  aliens  who, 
boy  like,  shoot  at  nearly  every  wild  thing  they  see,  should 
be  stopped  from  carrying  arms  altogether. 

Hunting  Licenses.  —  Possibly  both  these  classes  might  be 
shut  out  largely  by  licensing  all  shooters.  Apparently  the 
license  has  now  come  to  this  country  to  stay.  In  a  recent  bul- 
letin, entitled  "Hunting  licenses,  their  history,  objects  and 
limitations,"*  Dr.  T.  S.  Palmer  of  the  United  States  Bio- 
logical Survey  gives  a  history  of  the  hunting  license  in  this 
and  foreign  countries.  The  license  not  only  furnishes  money 
for  the  enforcement  of  the  law  by  paid  wardens,  but  it  also 
increases  the  interest  of  the  citizen  in  its  enforcement.  A 
man  who  has  paid  a  liberal  license  fee  is  not  likely  to  encour- 
age others  in  hunting  without  a  license.  The  amount  re- 
ceived from  licenses  may  be  considerable.  Maine  collected 
last  year  more  than  twenty-five  thousand  dollars ;  Wiscon- 
sin, ninety  thousand  dollars ;  and  Illinois,  nearly  one  hun- 
dred thousand  dollars.  Massachusetts  could  never  hope  to 
reach  these  figures,  but  she  might  succeed  in  preventing 
hunting  or  shooting  by  many  non-citizens  and  non-residents 
through  a  high-license  system  discriminating  against  them. 
Here,  however,  we  are  met  by  the  objection  that  such  an 
act  would  be  unconstitutional ;  but  this  is  a  question  to  be 
decided  by  the  courts.  The  imposition  of  a  license  is  noth- 
ing new.  One  of  the  earliest  license  laws  passed  in  this 
country  was  enacted  in  Virginia  in  April,  1691.  In  the 
early  part  of  our  history  such  laws  were  few  and  perhaps 
unnecessary ;  but  within  the  last  twenty-five  years  their 
necessity  seems  to  have  become  apparent,  and  within  ten 
years  their  number  has  increased  rapidly.  They  are  now 
in  force  in  thirty-five  States  and  Territories  in  this  country, 
and  also  in  the  seven  provinces  of  Canada.  Many  foreign 

*  Bulletin  No.  19,  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture,  Division  of  Bio- 
logical Survey. 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  525 

countries  have  long  had  hunting  licenses.  In  England  a 
man  must  have  a  gun  license,  a  hunting  license,  a  license  to 
use  a  hunting  dog,  and  even,  in  some  cases,  a  game  keeper's 
license  also.  In  America  a  resident  is  usually  taxed  one 
dollar,  while  a  non-resident  is  required  to  contribute  from 
ten  to  one  hundred  dollars. 

The  main  objects  of  hunting  licenses  are  two:  (1)  to 
limit  shooting,  especially  on  the  part  of  non-residents  ;  (2) 
to  raise  money  for  game  or  bird  protection.  The  license 
tends  to  preserve  the  game  of  the  State  for  the  benefit  of 
its  own  people,  to  whom  it  is  held  to  belong.  The  utility 
of  the  license  may  be  gathered  from  the  fact  that  ten  States 
licensed  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  million  hunters  in  1903. 
The  license  has  the  advantage  that  by  it  the  owner  may  be 
positively  identified.  It  may  contain  his  description  and 
photograph,  and  he  may  be  obliged  to  produce  it  at  the 
request  of  any  citizen.  While  I  would  not  be  understood 
as  advocating  any  particular  license  law,  it  seems  to  me  that 
the  subject  is  worthy  of  careful  consideration. 

The  following  extract  from  a  letter  from  Dr.  T.  S.  Palmer 
of  the  Biological  Survey  of  the  United  States  Department 
of  Agriculture,  who  has  charge  of  the  matter  of  game  pres- 
ervation, shows  clearly  the  measures  that  he  advocates  to 
protect  the  birds  :  "  The  decrease  in  certain  species  of  birds 
is  not  difficult  to  explain,  and  it  is  attributable  largely  to 
long  open  seasons  and  open  markets.  Comparatively  few 
States  afford  shore  birds  any  real  protection,  the  seasons 
often  being  open  during  the  height  of  the  migration  season, 
and  closed  when  the  birds  are  absent  from  the  State.  The 
exemptions  in  some  of  the  laws,  allowing  practically  unre- 
stricted sale  of  birds  taken  outside  the  State,  place  a  pre- 
mium on  the  destruction  of  birds  in  States  where  the  laws 
are  lax.  Fortunately,  since  the  passage  of  the  new  law  last 
spring,  sale  in  Massachusetts  is  now  prohibited  during  the 
close  season,  though  the  privilege  of  storing  game  and  hold- 
ing it  in  possession  from  one  season  to  another  still  invites 
wholesale  destruction  of  game  birds  for  market  purposes 
elsewhere.  The  destruction  of  non-game  birds  is  not  due 
to  lack  of  protection  so  much  as  to  failure  to  deal  effectively 


526  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

with  certain  special  conditions  which  have  recently  arisen. 
The  remedy  for  present  conditions  is  clear,  but  difficult  to 
apply ;  namely,  to  prohibit  spring  shooting,  to  restrict  the 
sale  of  game  birds,  and  to  prevent  market  hunting  and 
indiscriminate  slaughter  of  game  and  small  birds.  The 
destruction  of  birds  by  foreigners  has  thus  far  assumed  a 
serious  aspect  in  only  a  few  States.  The  most  successful 
means  of  dealing  with  it  thus  far  suggested  is  a  ten-dollar 
hunting  license  required  of  all  foreign-born  un naturalized 
residents  of  the  State.  Such  a  law  has  been  adopted  in 
both  Louisiana  and  Pennsylvania,  and  has  thus  far  proved 
quite  satisfactory." 

Bounty  Laws.  —  Sufficient  protection  will  be  given  to 
birds  against  their  natural  enemies  by  the  shooters  them- 
selves, when  they  learn  what  protection  is  needed.  All 
gunners  will  shoot  the  Cooper  and  sharp-shinned  hawks  at 
sight,  when  they  know  them  and  know  their  character. 
They  will  also  shoot  cats,  foxes,  crows,  squirrels  and  all  the 
enemies  of  birds  indiscriminately,  whenever  they  recognize 
them  as  enemies.  Hence,  so  long  as  wre  allow  the  shooting 
of  game,  the  shooters  are  likely  to  keep  the  enemies  of 
birds  within  reasonable  limits.  Crows,  foxes  and  bird- 
hawks  may  increase  in  some  cases,  owing  to  their  well- 
known  ability  to  take  care  of  themselves  ;  but  the  law  does 
not  protect  any  of  these  creatures,  and  they  may  be  kept  in 
subjection  without  the  stimulus  of  bounty  laws.  Bounty 
laws  may  have  been  wise  and  even  necessary  in  the  early 
history  of  this  Commonwealth,  when  there  were  wolves, 
bears,  panthers  and  rattlesnakes  to  be  exterminated ;  now, 
however,  they  are  in  general  unwise,  unnecessary,  uncalled 
for,  and  in  effect  positively  injurious. 

We  must  admit  that  such  laws  operate  to  reduce  the  num- 
bers of  the  animals  proscribed  by  them,  provided  the  bounty 
is  made  sufficiently  large.  It  is  perfectly  clear  that  any 
animal,  the  destruction  of  which  will  put  much  money  into 
some  one's  pocket,  is  doomed  to  the  same  kind  of  persecu- 
tion as  was  the  game  before  it  was  protected  by  law.  The 
result  of  this  kind  of  persecution  is  patent  to  all ;  and  if  a 
heavy  uniform  bounty  on  any  one  animal  could  be  paid 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  527 

throughout  the  continent,  it  would  be,  in  time,  either  exter- 
minated or  rendered  so  rare  that  hunting  it  would  be  un- 
profitable. Admitting  that  such  bounty  laws,  if  uniformly 
adopted,  would  be  effective,  let  us  first  see  why  their  results 
are,  in  general,  pernicious. 

The  main  object  of  all  bird  legislation  is  to  protect  the 
birds.  This  can  be  done  by  restricting  both  the  number  of 
shooters  and  the  time  during  which  shooting  is  allowed. 
Bounty  laws  have  precisely  the  opposite  effect.  They  en- 
courage boys,  foreigners  and  unemployed  persons  to  roam 
with  guns  in  their  hands  through  the  woods  and  fields  at  all 
seasons  of  the  year.  This  is  sure  to  result  in  the  destruc- 
tion of  game  birds  and  insectivorous  birds  at  all  seasons,  to 
say  nothing  of  the  poultry  and  other  property  of  the  farm- 
ers that,  perforce,  must  suffer.  Probably  every  State  that 
has  offered  bounties  in  recent  years  has  had  this  experience. 

Bounty  laws  always  put  a  premium  upon  dishonesty. 
Under  the  so-called  scalp  act  of  1885,  in  Pennsylvania,  up- 
wards of  two  thousand  dollars  were  realized  for  a  buffalo 
hide  and  a  mule  skin  in  one  county,  by  a  party  of  hunters. 
These  hides  were  cut  up  and  "  fixed  "  to  resemble  the  scalps 
or  ears  of  predatory  mammals.  Whether  the  magistrates 
also  were  "fixed "  is  not  recorded.  A  red  fox  was  slain  in 
one  of  the  mountainous  districts  and  its  pelt  cut  into  sixty- 
one  parts,  for  which  the  hunter  received  sixty-one  dollars. 
Bounties  were  paid  on  the  heads  of  domestic  fowls,  grouse, 
cuckoos,  and  even  English  sparrows,  which  were  supposed 
to  have  been  palmed  off  on  the  authorities  as  the  heads  of 
hawks  and  owls.  Birds  and  mammals  were  killed  in  other 
States  and  shipped  into  Pennsylvania,  and  large  amounts  of 
money  were  thus  fraudulently  obtained.*  This  but  repeats 
the  history  of  local  and  State  bounty  laws  everywhere. 

A  bounty  on  cats,  foxes,  crows,  hawks,  owls,  English  spar- 
rows, weasels  and  skunks  would  be  very  expensive  to  the 
State.  Pennsylvania  paid  out  during  one  year  not  less  than 
one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  dollars  for  bounties  on  birds 
and  mammals.  Montana  paid  out  within  six  months  in  1887 

*  "  Birds  of  Massachusetts,"  Dr.  B.  H.  Warren,  annual  report  Massachusetts 
State  Board  of  Agriculture,  1890,  p.  45. 


528  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

more  than  fifty  thousand  dollars  in  bounties  for  ground  squir- 
rels and  prairie  dogs.  As  at  that  time  these  animals  had 
not  decreased  perceptibly,  a  special  session  of  the  Legisla- 
ture was  called  to  repeal  the  law,  lest  it  bankrupt  the  State. 

While  the  effect  of  bounty  laws,  in  general,  is  bad,  the 
practical  operation  of  laws  directed  at  particular  species  is 
certainly  vicious.  We  may  regard  a  bounty  on  the  heads 
of  cats  as  impracticable,  for  obvious  reasons,  not  the  least 
among  which  might  be  the  encouragement  of  a  new  indus- 
try,—  the  raising  of  kittens  for  the  bounty.  A  bounty  on 
cats,  foxes,  weasels  and  skunks  would  encourage  trapping, 
which  is  already  exterminating  some  of  the  smaller  fur- 
bearing  animals.  The  experience  of  States  which  have 
placed  bounties  on  the  head  of  the  English  sparrow  has  not 
been  encouraging.  These  acts  are  said  to  have  resulted  in 
a  slight  decrease  of  the  sparrows,  and  the  destruction  of 
great  numbers  of  native  birds  killed  and  ignorantly  offered 
for  bounty.  To  put  a  bounty  on  the  head  of  the  sparrow  is 
practically  equivalent  to  offering  a  bounty  on  all  our  native 
sparrows,  many  of  the  warblers,  the  thrushes,  wrens  and  a 
few  other  species.  Anything  that  at  a  distance  looks  like 
a  sparrow  would  be  killed,  and  probably  in  most  cases  the 
bounty  would  be  paid,  unless  a  competent  naturalist  could  be 
appointed  in  each  town  or  county  seat  to  pass  on  the  heads. 

If  we  offer  a  bounty  on  the  crow,  most  of  our  native 
crows  which  do  the  mischief  probably  will  escape,  and  the 
bounty  will  be  paid  mainly  on  birds  that  came  from  the 
north  in  winter.  The  difficulty  of  killing  crows  in  the  sum- 
mer prevents  many  being  taken  at  that  time.  In  the  winter 
most  of  the  crows  that  summer  here  probably  go  farther 
south,  their  places  being  taken  by  crows  from  farther  north. 
It  is  at  this  time  that  crows  are  most  readily  killed,  either 
by  baiting  or  at  their  roosts  ;  and  therefore  most  of  the 
crows  offered  for  bounty  would  be  those  which  never  do  any 
injury  here,  while  the  guilty  ones  would  escape. 

A  bounty  on  hawks  or  owls  would  work  injury  to  the 
agricultural  interests.  Hawks,  with  a  few  exceptions,  are 
useful  birds.  Owls,  being  probably  among  the  most  useful 
of  all  birds,  should  be  protected  by  law,  rather  than  pro- 


Xo.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  529 

scribed.  When  in  1886  the  people  of  Pennsylvania  became 
aware  of  the  injurious  effects  of  the  scalp  act,  Dr.  C.  Hart 
Merriain,  then  ornithologist  and  mammalogist  of  the  United 
States  Department  of  Agriculture,  his  assistant,  Dr.  A.  K. 
Fisher,  and  Dr.  B.  H.  Warren,  examined  over  three  hundred 
and  fifty  stomachs  of  the  hawks  and  owls  killed  under  the 
act.  Ninety-five  per  cent  of  the  food  materials  of  these 
birds  was  found  to  consist,  not  of  poultry  and  game,  but  of 
"mice  and  other  destructive  mammals,  grasshoppers  and 
many  injurious  beetles."  Dr.  Merriam  says,  in  his  report 
for  1886:  "By  virtue  of  this  act,  about  ninety  thousand 
dollars  has  been  paid  in  bounties  during  the  year  and  a  half 
that  has  elapsed  since  the  law  went  into  effect.  This  rep- 
resents the  destruction  of  at  least  128,571  of  the  above- 
mentioned  animals,  most  of  which  were  hawks  and  owls. 
Granting  that  five  thousand  chickens  are  killed  annually  in 
Pennsylvania  by  hawks  and  owls,  and  that  they  are  worth 
twenty-five  cents  each  (a  liberal  estimate,  in  view  of  the 
fact  that  a  large  proportion  of  them  are  killed  when  very 
young),  the  total  loss  would  be  $1,250,  and  the  poultry 
killed  in  a  year  and  a  half  would  be  worth  $1,875.  Hence 
it  appears  that  in  the  past  eighteen  months  the  State  of 
Pennsylvania  has  expended  $90,000  to  save  its  farmers  a 
loss  of  $1,875.  But  this  estimate  by  no  means  represents 
the  actual  loss  to  the  farmer  and  the  tax  payer  of  the  State." 
Dr.  Merriam  then  goes  on  to  show  the  vast  loss  that  must 
result  to  the  people  of  Pennsylvania,  who,  by  killing  these 
hawks  and  owls,  have  saved  the  field  mice  and  other  harmful 
creatures  on  which  the  birds  otherwise  would  have  preyed. 
The  Legislature  of  Pennsylvania  appointed  a  State  ornithol- 
ogist, and  repealed  the  scalp  act.  We  do  not  need  a  "  scalp 
act"  in  Massachusetts. 

Dukes  County  and  the  town  of  Lakeville  now  pay  boun- 
ties on  hawks  and  owls.  This  unwise  policy  should  be 
discontinued.  There  are  many  sections  in  eastern  Massa- 
chusetts where  hawks  and  owls  are  becoming  rare.  During 
the  winter  of  1903-04  many  farmers  had  their  young  fruit 
trees  ruined  by  the  mice,  which  ate  away  the  bark.  If  this 
continues,  a  demand  for  the  protection  of  hawks  and  owls 


530  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 

is  sure  to  come.  The  placing  of  a  bounty  on  the  few  inju- 
rious species  of  hawks  has  been  proposed.  No  such  meas- 
ure should  be  enacted,  for  it  would  result  in  the  increased 
killing  of  all  hawks.  Moreover,  our  present  law,  allowing 
the  destruction  of  all  hawks  and  owls,  is  in  this  respect 
wrong,  and  should  be  modified. 

Control  of  the  Cat.  —  As  it  is  almost  universally  admitted 
that  the  cat  is  one  of  the  greatest  enemies  of  birds,  many 
suggestions  have  been  offered  in  regard  to  controlling  the 
pest.  The  law  which  prohibits  a  man  from  killing  certain 
birds  at  all  times  does  not  prohibit  him  from  keeping  any 
number  of  cats,  and  allowing  them  to  run  at  large,  not 
only  killing  these  same  birds,  but  torturing  them  as  well. 
In  this  respect  our  game  laws  and  bird  laws  are  farcical. 
But  what  remedy  shall  we  provide  ?  The  cat  license  finds 
the  most  advocates.  If  a  license  fee  of  two  dollars  or  more 
were  demanded  for  each  cat,  and  a  penalty  provided  for 
failure  to  comply  with  the  law,  the  number  of  cats  soon 
would  be  reduced.  This  would  be  a  distinct  advantage. 
Every  man,  however,  would  have  to  be  a  self-appointed 
officer  to  kill  all  unlicensed  cats,  while  the  licensed  cats, 
being  protected  by  law,  would  continue  to  roam  the  fields  and 
woods  with  impunity,  killing  far  more  birds  than  licensed 
dogs  do  now.  With  cats  unlicensed  and  in  too  many  cases 
uncared  for,  as  at  present,  every  sportsman  or  gunner  who 
is  out  after  game  should  shoot  every  cat  he  sees  running 
at  large  in  the  woods.  A  box  trap  baited  with  catnip  will 
capture  a  large  number  of  cats  in  the  course  of  a  year. 
This  protective  device  is  used  by  breeders  of  pheasants  and 
by  poultrymen.  I  have  described  some  cat-proof  fences 
and  other  devices  for  protecting  birds  against  cats,  in  a  bul- 
letin on  methods 'of  attracting  and  protecting  birds,  to  be 
issued  by  the  Hatch  Experiment  Station  at  Amherst,  Mass. 

The  suggestion  regarding  the  planting  of  trees  and  other 
plants  that  will  provide  both  food  and  shelter  for  the  birds 
is  a  good  one,  which  is  also  treated  at  some  length  in  the 
bulletin  above  referred  to. 

The  Establishment  of  State  Parks  for  the  Preservation  of 
Forests  and  Game.  —  This  is  a  policy  that  is  already  attract- 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  531 

ing  the  attention  of  the  national  government  and  many  of 
the  State  governments.  A  protected  natural  park  provides 
an  asylum  in  which  birds  can  find  security  from  their  greatest 
enemy,  man.  Here  they  can  find  breeding  grounds  where 
they  will  be  comparatively  unmolested,  when,  elsewhere, 
destruction  awaits  them  at  every  hand.  New  York  State, 
with  her  great  Adirondack  Reservation,  has  recently  estab- 
lished another  in  the  Catskills.  Massachusetts  already  has 
several  reservations  of  small  area.  These  might  be  increased 
in  number,  and  larger  tracts  of  wild  land  taken.  Men  of 
wealth  should  follow  the  example  of  Mr.  Corbin,  in  New 
Hampshire,  and  buy  up  tracts  of  hill  land  for  the  preserva- 
tion of  the  forests  and  the  game.  In  such  preserves  no 
shooting  of  game  or  birds  should  be  allowed.  If  birds 
were  protected  also  against  their  natural  enemies  in  many 
preserves  of  this  kind,  the  supply  would  be  constantly 
renewed.  One  or  more  reservations  might  be  established 
on  our  coast  for  the  benefit  of  water-fowl  and  shore  birds. 
Parts  of  Nantucket,  Chatham,  Monomoy,  Wellfleet  or  other 
places  on  Cape  Cod,  the  Ipswich  marshes,  or  some  similar 
resorts  of  water-fowl  and  wading  birds,  might  be  secured 
in  time  to  perpetuate  the  natural  features  of  these  bird 
resorts,  and  afford  the  fowl  safe  feeding  ground,  upon 
which  they  could  remain  undisturbed  indefinitely.  "We 
have  thus  far  secured  only  a  few  of  the  beaches  near  Bos- 
ton, and  these  are  so  frequented  by  people  that  most  of  the 
birds  are  driven  off;  still,  a  few  shore  birds  may  now  be 
seen  occasionally  along  Nahant  Neck. 

Protection  for  the  Smaller  Species  that  are  diminishing.  — 
That  portion  of  the  Massachusetts  statutes  which  applies  to 
the  smaller  birds  is  very  nearly  perfect ;  they  are  nearly  all 
protected  at  all  times.  The  unprotected  species  hardly  de- 
serve protection.  If  the  law  can  be  properly  enforced,  the 
birds  are  safe  except  as  they  may  be  interfered  with  by  the 
changes  which  take  place  around  the  centres  of  population. 
The  erection  of  buildings,  the  laying  out  of  streets,  the  cut- 
ting of  trees  and  shrubbery,  the  draining  of  meadows  and 
similar  «'  improvements,"  the  building  of  trolley  roads  and 
telegraph  lines,  all  inimical  to  bird-life,  cannot  be  helped. 


532  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

It  is  probable  that  in  spite  of  all  these  agencies  the  smaller 
birds  can  maintain  their  numbers  outside  of  the  immediate 
influence  of  the  cities.  But  the  question  still  remains,  what 
shall  we  do  to  help  the  few  species  that  are  evidently  dimin- 
ishing under  protection  ? 

Of  these  species,  the  purple  martin  is  now  at  the  lowest 
ebb  in  point  of  numbers,  and  most  needs  such  assistance  as 
we  may  be  able  to  give  it  in  re-establishing  itself.  I  have 
learned  by  a  voluminous  correspondence  that  many  of  the 
empty  bird-houses  were  visited  either  in  spring  or  fall  by 
migrating  martins.  In  this  correspondence  one  significant 
fact  appeared.  Very  few  people  had  taken  the  trouble  to 
clean  out  the  martin-boxes,  and  remove  the  old  nests,  rub- 
bish and  dead  birds.  Mr.  Fred  B.  Pike  of  Cornish,  Me., 
writes  that  many  of  the  bird-houses  in  that  region  were 
"  full  of  dead  birds  from  last  year's  storm,"  and  the  martins 
did  not  go  into  them  to  breed ;  but  in  his  bird-house,  in 
which  there  were  no  dead  birds,  the  martins  bred  as  usual. 
Mr.  Herbert  Moulton,  Hiram,  Me.,  writes  that  he  took  his 
bird-house  down  in  the  spring  (1904)  and  cleaned  it  out, 
finding  five  or  six  dead  birds  in  some  of  the  rooms.  He 
then  put  the  house  on  a  pole  thirty-five  feet  high,  and  it  was 
occupied  by  twelve  birds,  among  which  were  three  females, 
which  raised  large  broods,  thus  re-establishing  the  colony. 
Not  one  of  the  other  bird-houses  in  the  vicinity  was  occu- 
pied. If  every  one  owning  a  martin-box  would  clean  it  out 
annually  before  the  last  week  in  April,  the  chances  of  the 
birds'  re-establishing  themselves  might  be  bettered.  The 
English  sparrows  must  be  kept  out  of  the  houses,  for  when 
they  once  get  the  rooms  filled  with  their  bulky  nests  and 
pugnacious  bodies,  the  few  martins  now  left  will  have  little 
chance  for  a  home. 

Mrs.  Mary  R.  Stanley  writes  from  North  Attleborough  of 
a  plan  which  she  thinks  will  keep  out  English  sparrows  from 
martin-boxes.  She  speaks  of  some  old  dwelling  houses 
where  holes  underneath  the  jet  were  made,  affording  the 
birds  access  to  the  space  under  the  eaves.  These,  she  says, 
were  used  by  martins,  and  have  never  been  used  by  the 
sparrows.  She  suggests  making  martin-boxes  with  all  the 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF  BIRDS.  533 

entrances  underneath,  and  without  perches,  believing  that 
the  sparrows  will  not  enter  them.  The  experiment  might 
be  worth  trying,  for  every  promising  means  should  be  used 
to  entice  migrating  martins  to  remain  and  breed.  Every 
householder  suitably  located  should  put  up  at  least  one 
small  martin-box  on  a  pole  not  less  than  twenty  feet  high. 
Then,  whenever  the  martins  north  or  south  of  Massachu- 
setts have  a  good  breeding  season,  we  shall  be  ready  to 
take  care  of  the  overflow. 

Barn  swallows  may  be  fostered  by  keeping  the  old-fash- 
ioned barns  and  sheds  open  (or  at  least  one  open  window  in 
each).  Round  or  rough-hewn  rafters  furnish  supporting 
points  for  their  nests.  Small  blocks  nailed  up  on  mod- 
ern squared  rafters,  or  slats  nailed  across  them,  will  assist 
these  swallows  in  building.  The  eave  swallows  may  be 
helped  by  nailing  a  rough  board  on  the  outside  of  the 
building,  about  a  foot  below  where  the  eaves  or  jet  meet 
the  Avail.  The  only  nest  of  this  species  that  I  saw  in  Bris- 
tol County  last  year  was  built  on  the  ledge  over  the  door  of 
a  painted  barn. 

Tree  swallows  need  no  assistance  beyond  being  supplied 
with  an  abundance  of  small  nesting-boxes,  widely  separated 
and  put  up  on  poles  or  trees.  If  the  English  sparrow  can  be 
kept  away  from  the  nesting-boxes,  the  swallows  will  breed 
well. 

We  may  help  the  house  wren  a  little  by  putting  up  small 
nesting  boxes  with  the  entrance  hole  no  larger  than  a  silver 
quarter.  The  small  size  of  the  entrance  probably  will  serve 
to  keep  out  the  sparrow. 

The  mourning  dove  is  now  fully  protected  by  law,  at  all 
times,  in  Maine,  New  Hampshire,  Massachusetts,  Vermont, 
Rhode  Island,  Connecticut,  New  York,  New  Jersey,  Dela- 
ware, the  District  of  Columbia  and  Virginia.  In  the  other 
Atlantic  Coast  States  it  is  still  on  the  game  list.  On  one 
occasion  in  1904  in  Concord  I  saw  twelve  birds  flying  up  a 
meadow.  A  single  shot  was  fired  at  them  by  some  one,  and 
the  flock  came  back ;  but  there  were  only  eleven  birds  re- 
maining. The  laws  which  protect  this  species  at  all  times 
are  comparatively  recent,  and  are  not  as  yet  generally  known 


534  BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

and  respected.  These  doves  are  always  shot  without  re- 
straint in  fall  and  winter  in  the  southern  States.  They 
must  be  given  better  protection  both  north  and  south,  as 
they  appear  to  be  decreasing  quite  generally. 

RECAPITULATION  AND  CONCLUSION. 
The  Decrease  of  Species. 

1.  The  action  of  the  elements  in  1903-04  was  very  dis- 
astrous  to   three   species   only,  —  the    purple    martin,   the 
bob-white  or  quail,  and  the  long-billed  marsh  wren.     The 
sportsmen  are  making  an  effort  to  restock  the  covers  with 
quail,  but  they  meet  with  indifferent  success  in  obtaining 
birds.     The   martins   appear   to   be  nearly  extinct  in   the 
breeding  season ;  only  a  few  pairs  are  left  in  a  few  locali- 
ties.    The  marsh  wrens  appear  to  be  nearly  exterminated 
or  driven  out  locally.     The  chimney  swifts  suffered  greatly, 
and  the  swallows  to  a  less  degree ;  Carolina  rails  and  Vir- 
ginia rails  also  suffered  much.     Other  species  suffered  much 
locally  and   some   quite   generally,    but   a   good   breeding 
season  in  1904  has  done  much  to  efface  the  effects  of  the 
storms. 

2.  The   accounts    of    early   historians    show   that    game 
birds,  water-fowl  and  shore  birds  were  wonderfully  abun- 
dant during  the  settlement  of  Massachusetts.     Since  then 
at  least  six  species  have  disappeared,  and  several  others  are 
nearly  extirpated    or  driven    out,  —  some    quite   recently. 
Among  the  latter  are  the  long-billed  curlew,  the  Eskimo 
curlew,  the  golden  plover,  the  lesser  snow  goose  and  the 
passenger  pigeon.     The  wood  duck,  the  Bartramian  sand- 
piper or  upland  plover,  the  knot  and  the  dowitcher  are  also 
disappearing  rapidly. 

The  river  ducks  have  decreased  steadily,  but  the  bay  and 
sea  ducks  are  still  numerous,  with  few  exceptions.  Shore 
birds  generally  have  lessened  in  number  about  75  per  cent 
within  the  memory  of  living  men. 

Eagles  appear  to  be  rare  or  decreasing  in  nearly  all  sec- 
tions. The  larger  hawks  and  owls  have  diminished  much 
in  most  of  eastern  Massachusetts ;  but  the  decrease  of 
hawks  and  owls  has  been  only  local  in  the  central  and  west- 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  535 

ern  parts  of  the  State,  where  they  are  generally  at  least 
holding  their  own. 

Great  blue  herons  probably  rarely  breed  now  in  the  State, 
and  other  herons  seem  to  have  diminished  somewhat  gener- 
ally, although  in  some  sections  their  numbers  seem  subject 
to  little  change.  The  night  herons  have  recently  increased 
in  numbers  where  the  heronries  have  been  protected. 

Crows,  while  fluctuating  much,  have  generally  held  their 
own,  and  in  many  sections  have  increased  in  numbers. 
Mourning  doves  have  decreased,  and  are  generally  rare  or 
wanting  except  in  some  eastern  sections.  There  are  some 
indications,  however,  that  they  may  be  increasing  now  in  a 
few  localities. 

The  smaller  native  birds  fluctuate,  some  species  decreas- 
ing in  some  localities  and  increasing  in  others,  but  appar- 
ently holding  their  own  very  well,  in  general.  There  may 
be  a  slight  decrease  in  the  aggregate,  owing  to  the  evident 
diminution  of  many  species  in  and  near  the  cities,  with  no 
corresponding  increase  in  the  country.  There  appears  to 
be  no  general  and  noticeable  reduction  in  the  rural  sections 
except  where  the  birds  are  subjected  to  an  unusual  amount 
of  persecution.  On  the  whole,  the  balance  of  life  among 
the  smaller  birds  seems  to  be  fairly  maintained. 

Swallows  seem  to  have  diminished  somewhat  generally, 
but  more  especially  in  and  near  the  cities  and  larger  towns. 
In  the  rural  districts  the  cliff,  or  eave,  swallow  shows  the 
greatest  diminution,  and  the  tree  swallow  the  least. 

Nighthawks  have  decreased  much  sectionally.  The  house 
wren  has  become  very  local,  and  is  now  rare  or  wanting 
in  most  localities  where  it  was  formerly  common.  The 
red-headed  woodpecker  has  practically  disappeared  as  a 
summer  resident.  On  the  other  hand,  the  rose-breasted 
grosbeak  now  occupies  more  territory  than  formerly,  and 
the  robin  and  bluebird  have  increased  within  a  few  years. 

Information  received  from  other  States  along  the  Atlantic 
seaboard  seems  to  indicate  that,  as  here,  shore  birds  and 
game  birds  are  decreasing,  while  the  insectivorous  birds  are, 
with  some  exceptions,  holding  their  own. 


536  BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 

The  Chief  Causes  of  the  Reduction  in  Birds'  Numbers. 
Most  important  of  all  is  man,  —  sportsmen,  Italians  and/ 
\other  foreigners,  bird  shooters  and  trappers,  market  hunt-) 
Sers,  boy  gunners,  egg  collectors,  and  certain  changes  inci-\ 
(dent  to  an  increase  of  population. 

Secondary  Causes  of  Bird  Diminution. 
Natural  Enemies.  —  These  do  not,  under  natural  condi- 
tions, reduce  the  numbers  of  birds,  as  they  protect  the  spe- 
cies on  which  they  prey ;  but  certain  introduced  species  have 
become  very  harmful.  The  domestic  cat  and  the  English 
sparrow  (the  sparrow  in  particular)  are  mainly  responsible 
for  the  disappearance  of  swallows,  wrens  and  other  species 
near  the  cities.  The  sparrow,  while  not  now  increasing  in 
or  near  Suffolk  County,  seems  to  be  increasing  and  spread- 
ing in  the  country  districts.  If  this  continues,  a  further 
diminution  in  the  numbers  of  native  birds  is  likely  to  result . 

Native  natural  enemies  of  birds  ma\r  become  harmful  when 

x**"""' 

protected  by  man  from  their  own  enemies.     We  have  pro- 

\    •c»~— .PM^—WW"^"** ™"w— ••i<*™— "**"* 

tected  crows  and  foxes   in  some  measure  by  destroying  the 

>k  larger  birds  and  mammals  which  fed  on  them,  and  they  have 

)  become  numerous  enough  in  some  localities  to  be  injurious 

/   to  the  already  reduced  game  birds  and  the  song  birds. 

Suggestions  for  the  Better  Protection  of  Birds. 
First  and  most  important,  teach  the  people  the  economic 
value  of  birds,  and  show  the  consequences  that  are  likely  to 
follow  their  extirpation.  This  should  begin  in  the  schools, 
by  interesting  the  children  in  the  lives  of  birds,  teaching 
their  usefulness,  and  how  to  feed,  shelter  and  protect  them. 
The  children  should  also  be  instructed  in  regard  to  the  laws 
protecting  birds,  and  be  taught  to  respect  them.  The  bird 
and  game  laws  must  be  enforced,  even  if  it  requires  larger 
appropriations  for  the  Fish  and  Game  Commission,  with  the 
appointment  of  more  paid  deputies.  In  this  connection  a 
law  licensing  shooters,  the  license  fees  to  be  applied  to  the 
enforcement  of  the  game  laws,  may  be  worth  considering. 
•  The  officers  of  the  Fish  and  Game  Commission  should  be 


No.  4.]  DECREASE   OF   BIRDS.  537 

given  the  right  to  search  suspected  persons.  Until  such  a 
measure  is  enacted,  the  game  laws  can  never  be  enforced  as 
they  should  be. 

Those  birds  which,  like  the  wood  duck,  are  disappearing, 
should  be  protected  at  all  times  by  law.  All  spring  and 
summer  shooting  of  wild-fowl  and  shore  birds  should  be, 
and  eventually  must  be,  prohibited  by  law. 

If  it  shall  be  found  that  these  measures  do  not  give  suf- 
ficient protection,  then  the  sale  of  all  birds  from  Massachu- 
setts sources  must  be  prohibited.  All  persons  and  all 
associations  interested  in  bird  protection  should  unite  to 
hold  up  the  hands  of  those  who  are  now  working  to  secure 
the  protection  of  birds  in  the  south  during  the  winter  and 
spring. 

The  extirpation  of  a  species  usually  takes  a  long  time, 
and  only  those  species  which  are  the  objects  of  special  and 
unremitting  persecution  throughout  their  range  are  likely 
ever  to  be  eradicated  from  the  country.  For  this  reason, 
our  "song  and  insectivorous  birds,"  which  are  here  pro- 
tected by  law,  will  be  comparatively  safe  when  the  law  is 
fully  enforced.  But  it  is  not  so  difficult  practically  to  exter- 
minate or  to  drive  out  of  a  State  a  migrant  or  a  resident 
game  bird  ;  therefore,  the  game  birds,  the  shore  birds  and 
all  others  that  are  readily  accessible  and  are  killed  for  food 
or  sport  must  now  be  protected  by  the  most  stringent  laws, 
most  rigidly  enforced,  or  eventually  they  will  be  swept  from 
the  territory  of  this  Commonwealth. 

APPENDIX. 

Massachusetts  Correspondents  who  furnished  Information  for 

this  Report. 

Berkshire  County. 

Bidwell,  Wm.  S., Monterey. 

Bradley,  Alonzo,       ......  Lee. 

Came,  Mrs.  Thos Forest  Park,  Adams. 

Cross,  W.  J Becket. 

Dewey,  Harvey  H., New  Lenox. 

Northup,  L.  J., Cheshire. 

O'Neill,  Francis, Adams. 

Ruberg,  L.  E., Florida. 


538 


BOARD   OF  AGRICULTURE.     [Pub.  Doc. 


Salmon,  Timothy  B., 

.     Richmond. 

Snow,  W.  H  

.     Becket. 

Stearns,  W.  R  

.     Pittsfield. 

Van  Huyck,  J.  M.,   

-    Lee. 

Wood,  J.  H.,    

.     Pittsfield. 

Hampshire  County. 

Baker,  N.  B  

.     West  Chesterfield, 

Brewer,  J.  L.,  . 

.     Pelham. 

Brooks,  Prof.  Wm.  P  

.     Amherst. 

Eldredge,  A.  H.,       

.     Ware. 

Fernald,  Dr.  H.  T.,  

.     Amherst. 

Lyman,  C.  B.,  ...... 

.     Southampton. 

Nelligan,  Prof.  R.  F., 

.     Amherst. 

Nichols,  A.  W.,        

.     Chesterfield. 

Pratt,  A.  L.,     

.     Belchertown. 

Richards,  F.  C.,        

.     Williamsburg. 

Russell,  H.  C.,          

North  Hadley. 

Sornborger,  M.  L.,  . 

.     Haydenville. 

Hampden  County. 

Adams,  Miss  Emily  B., 

.     Springfield. 

Bagg,  J.  N.,     

.     West  Springfield. 

Bemis,  R.  W.,  

.     Chicopee  Falls. 

Clark,  E.  C.,    

.     Wilbraham. 

Fairfield,  Mrs.  S.  L., 

.     Monson. 

Healey,  M.  C.,          

.     Thorndike. 

Hendrick,  J.  H.,                 , 

.     Springfield. 

Luman,  J.  F.,  ...... 

.     Palmer. 

Marsh,  Daniel  J.,      

.     Springfield. 

Morris,  Robert  O.,    

.     Springfield. 

Rogers,  F.  D.,  

.     Monson. 

Sanford,  Mrs.  Fred.  A.,    . 

.     Westfield. 

Scott,  F.  H  

.     Westfield. 

White,  C.  A.,    

.    Ludlow  Centre. 

Franklin  County. 

Allen,  Thos.,    

Bernardston. 

Ballard,  Daniel,        

.     Millington. 

Cushman,  R.  H., 

.     Bernardston. 

Howard,  Anson  O.,  ..... 

.     East  Northfield. 

Nims,  Miss  Clara  W.,       .... 

.     Greenfield. 

Russell,  Chas.  C., 

.     Greenfield. 

Smith,  A.  A.,   ...... 

.     Lyons  ville. 

Swann,  H.  W.,          

.     Shelburne  Falls. 

Wells,  H.  A.,   

.    Deerfield. 

Woffenden,  F.  W.,    

.    Rowe. 

No.  4.] 


DECREASE   OF   BIRDS. 


539 


Worcester  County. 
Allen,  Jesse,     ...... 

Anderson,  Geo.  M., 

Both  well,  Ethan,       ..... 
Carkin,  Geo.  E.,        . 
Casavant,  F.  S., 

Chase,  Guy  H., 

Churchill,  Miss  Abby  P.,  . 

Durgin,  W.  F., 

Fisher,  Dr.  Jabez, 

Gibson,  C.  O., 

Hall,  Rufus  C., 

Hodge,  Prof.  Clifton  F.,   . 

Holden,  Wm., ...;.. 

Ingalls,  Chas.  E., 

Jefts,  A.  H., 

Kinney,  H.  E,., 

Love,  Joseph  P., 

Mann,  Miss  J.  Ardelle,     .... 

Martin,  J.  L.,   ...... 

Perry,  Wm.  S., 

Proctor,  Fred.  J., 

Prentiss,  Wm.  N., 

Smith,  Robert  F . 

Spalter,  Mrs.  F.  B., 

Stockwell,  S.  F., 

Stone,  C.  E., 

Thayer,  Col.  John  E., 

Txittle,  E.  F., 

Warren,  D.  A., 

Whitehead,  Geo.  E.,          .... 
Woodward,  Dr.  Lemuel  F., 

Middlesex  County. 
Appleton,  Miss  Augusta  I., 
Aspinwall,  W.  H.,    . 

Bailey,  C.  E., 

Bailey,  Dr.  J.  W 

Barnard,  Mrs.  Josephine  M.,    . 
Brewster,  Wm.,        ..... 

Comey,  A.  C., 

Coolidge,  Philip  T.,           .... 
Douglas,  N.  B., 


.  Oakham. 

.  Worcester. 

.  Northborough. 

.  Royalston. 

.  Gardner. 

.  Princeton. 

.  Fitchburg. 

.  Hopedale. 

.  Fitchburg. 

.  Fitchburg. 

.  Webster. 

.  Worcester. 

.  Leominster. 

.  East  Templeton. 

.  Athol. 

.  Worcester. 

.  Webster. 

.  Millville. 

.  Milford. 

.  Worcester. 

.  Fitchburg. 

.  Milford. 

.  Uxbridge. 

.  Winchendon. 

.  Auburn. 

.  Lunenburg. 

.  Lancaster. 

.  Uxbridge.* 

.  Upton. 

.  Millbury. 
Worcester. 


Winchester. 

Chestnut  Hill. 

North  Billerica. 

Arlington. 

Westford. 

Cambridge. 

Cambridge. 

Watertown. 

Sherborn. 


Present  address,  Franklin,  Norfolk  County. 


540 


BOARD   OF   AGRICULTURE.    [Pub.  Doc. 


Frost,  H.  G.,    . 
Gerry,  Elbridge, 
Hagar,  Geo.  W., 
Higginson,  A.  H.,     .  . 
Hill,  Miss  Elizabeth  S., 
Hoffman,  Ralph, 
Holden,  Edward  F., 
Hornbrooke,  Mrs.  F.  B., 
Hunter,  W.  J., 
Kirkland,  A.  H.,       . 
Kohlrausch,  C.  H.,  Jr., 
Mayuard,  C.  J., 
Mills,  J.  I.,      . 
Parker,  Samuel, 
Parkhurst,  S.  W.,     . 
Poland,  Geo.  M.,      . 
Price,  Chas.  P., 
Randall,  Walter  B., . 
Robbins,  Miss  N.  P.  H., 
Smith,  Henry  N., 
Snow,  H.  A.,    . 
Steele,  Walter, 
Synimes,  S.  S., 
Wheeler,  C.  S., 
Wickersham,  C.  S.,  . 
Wood,  E.  W.,  . 


Essex  County. 


Waltham. 

Stoneham. 

Marlborough. 

South  Lincoln. 

Groton. 

Belniont. 

Melrose. 

Newton. 

Lincoln. 

Reading. 

Billerica. 

Newton  ville. 

Ayer. 

Wakefield. 

Chelmsford. 

Wakefield. 

Stoneham. 

Newton  Upper  Falls. 

Lowell. 

South  Sudbury. 

Marlborough. 

Stoneham. 

Winchester. 

Lincoln. 

Cambridge. 

West  Newton. 


Brown,  Gilman  W.,  ...  .         .  West  Newbury. 

Burney,  Thos.  L., West  Lynn. 

Chase,  H.  F., Amesbury. 

Dodge,  F.  C., Beverly. 

Farley,  J.  A., Lynnfield. 

Godfrey,  H.  L., Newburyport. 

Goodridge,  J.  W., Wenham. 

Goldsmith,  G.  W Beverly. 

Knowlton,  F.  S., Wenham. 

Loring,  Miss  K.  P., Pride's  Crossing. 

Nichols,  Miss  Mary  W., Hathorne. 

Nixon,  Wm.  W., Gloucester. 

Perkins,  C.  L., Newburyport. 

Pickering,  Miss  S.  W., Salem. 

Pike,  B.  P Topsfield. 

Pitman,  James,         ......  Swampscott. 

Prescott,  Chas., Amesbury. 

Robbins,  Reginald  C., Pride's  Crossing. 


No.  4.] 


DECREASE   OF   BIRDS. 


541 


Townsend,  Dr.  Chas.  W., 
Webster,  Eben,         ..... 
Wood,  Gardner,         .         .         . 
Young,  Hiram  A.,     . 

Suffolk  County. 

Allen,  F.  H.,    .  .         . 

Bangs,  Edward  A.,  . 
Bigelow,  Homer  L., 

Day,  Chester  S., 

Hemmenway,  Mrs.  Augustus,    . 

Kimball,  H.  H., 

Newcomb,  H.  H.,     ..... 
Shattuck,  Geo.  C.,     . 


Baldwin,  R.  N., 
Bent,  Herbert  A., 
Blake,  Francis  G.,     . 
Brastow,  Miss  A.  M., 
Burgess,  John  K.,     . 
Cabot,  Louis,    . 
Harris,  Samuel, 
Higbee,  Harry  G.,     . 
Horton,  I.  Chester,  . 
Kennard,  F.  H., 
McKechnie,  F.  B.,    . 
Richards,  Miss  Harriet  E., 
Richardson,  John  K., 
Searle,  Frank,  . 
Thayer,  Otis,    . 
Webster,  Frank  B.,  . 


Alger,  Isaac,     . 
Bent,  Arthur  C., 
Fleck,  Miss  Erne, 
Mosher,  F.  H., 
Packard,  H.  R., 
Proctor,  Frank  W.,  . 
Slade,  Elisha,   . 
Stanley,  Mrs.  Mary  R.,     . 
Sullivan,  James  H., . 
Tinkham,  Mrs.  Carrie  P., 
Tinkham,  H.  W.,      . 
Wharmbly,  Isaac,     .         , 
Winter,  Wm.  C.,      . 


Norfolk  County. 


Bristol  County. 


Ipswich. 
Haverhill. 
Groveland. 
Beverly. 

Boston. 
Boston. 
Boston. 
Boston. 
Boston. 
Boston. 
Boston. 
Boston. 


Wellesley. 

Franklin. 

Brookline. 

Wrenthani. 

Dedham. 

Brookline. 

East  Dedham. 

Hyde  Park. 

Ponkapog. 

Brookline. 

Ponkapog. 

Brookline. 

Wellesley. 

Franklin. 

West  Quincy. 

Hyde  Park. 

Attleborough. 

Taunton. 

Potters  ville. 

Dartmouth. 

Attleborough. 

Fairhaven. 

Somerset. 

North  Attleborough. 

Westport. 

North  Raynhain. 

Swansea. 

Fall  River. 

Mansfield. 


542 


BOAKD   OF  AGRICULTUKE.     [Pub.  Doc. 


Barnes,  Miss  Agnes  G., 
Bigelow,  Henry  B.,  . 
Bourne,  J.  H.,  . 
Brown,  Mrs.  Walter  L.f    . 
Can*,  Rufus  H., 
Dickson,  Chas., 
Delano,  John  W., 
Dyke,  Arthur  C., 
Kennedy,  Mrs.  A.  M., 
McMenamen,  Miss  S.  E.,  . 
Miles,  Mrs.  Henry  A., 
Shurtleff,  Walter  D., 
Southworth,  A.  C.,   . 
Thomas,  Dr.  F.  S.,  . 
Valler,  I.  H.,    . 


Plymouth  County. 


Brown,  Miss  Bertha  M., 
Clark,  J.  A.,     . 
Day,  Chester  S., 
Hammond,  W.  F.,     . 
Meigs,  Wm.,     . 
Nye,  D.  D.,       . 

Dunham,  W.  C., 
Mackay,  Geo.  H., 


Barnstable  County. 


Look,  James,    . 


Nantucket  County. 


Dukes  County. 


Plymouth. 

Cohasset. 

Marshfield. 

Brockton. 

Brockton. 

Plymouth. 

Marion. 

Bridgewater. 

Whitman. 

WTestdale. 

Hingham. 

Plymouth. 

Lakeville. 

Hanson. 

Plymouth. 


Hyannis. 

Eastham. 

Chathamport. 

Mashpee. 

South  Sandwich. 

Bourne. 


Nantucket. 
Nantucket. 


West  Tisbury. 


Corespondents  from  Other  States. 
Maine. 


Moulton,  Herbert, 
Pike,  Fred, 

Lane,  G.  W.,    . 
Thayer,  Abbot  H.,    . 

Barber,  Dr.  Geo.  F., 
Davenport,  Mrs.  E.  B., 
Perkins,  Dr.  G.  H.,  . 
Votey,  Prof.  J.  W.,  . 


New  Hampshire. 


Vermont. 


Hiram. 
Cornish. 


Chichester. 
Monadnock. 


Brattleboro' 
Brattleboro', 
Burlington. 
Burlington. 


No.  4.] 


DECREASE   OF  BIRDS. 


543 


Burdick,  H.  Hillyer, 
Hathaway,  H.  S., 
Lewis,  Edwin  R., 
Mearns,  Dr.  Edgar  A., 

Curtiss,  Robert  W.,  . 
Geer,  E.  Hart, 
Wright,  Mrs.  Mabel  O., 

Roosevelt,  Theodore, 
Chapman,  Frank  M., 
Pennock,  Prof.  C.  J., 
Palmer,  Dr.  T.  S.,  . 


Rhode  Island. 


Connecticut. 

New  York. 

New  Jersey. 

Pennsylvania. 

District  of  Columbia. 


Quonochontaug . 
Providence. 
Westerly. 
Newport. 

Stratford. 
Hadlyine. 
Fairfield. 


Oyster  Bay,  L.  I. 
Englewood. 
Rennet  Square. 
Washington. 


This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below 
REC'DCOLUB. 

DEC 


MAR  121911 


Form  L-9-15m-7,'31 


- 


CALIFORNIA 


